Re: 2.16.0 and 2.16.1 change with #{ #} syntax

2013-01-21 Thread Colin Hall
Jay Anderson writes: On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 2:14 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: It is somewhat embarrassing, but in my local stable branch I had already collected a few of the file/parser/EOF-related fixes in 2.17 when I told Philip to go ahead with releasing 2.16.2. I suppose I

Re: 2.16.0 and 2.16.1 change with #{ #} syntax

2013-01-15 Thread David Kastrup
Jay Anderson horndud...@gmail.com writes: In 2.16.0 creating a book inside #{ #} returned the book. In 2.16.1 and 2.16.2 this is no longer always the case. Here's an example which fails: \version 2.16.2 makeBook = #(define-void-function (parser location) () (let ((the-book

Re: 2.16.0 and 2.16.1 change with #{ #} syntax

2013-01-15 Thread Jay Anderson
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 2:14 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: It is somewhat embarrassing, but in my local stable branch I had already collected a few of the file/parser/EOF-related fixes in 2.17 when I told Philip to go ahead with releasing 2.16.2. I suppose I should complete the

2.16.0 and 2.16.1 change with #{ #} syntax

2013-01-14 Thread Jay Anderson
In 2.16.0 creating a book inside #{ #} returned the book. In 2.16.1 and 2.16.2 this is no longer always the case. Here's an example which fails: \version 2.16.2 makeBook = #(define-void-function (parser location) () (let ((the-book #{ \book { \include