yeah, dismissed it a bit hastily. geiser now loads fine for .scm, but M-. still 
fails to find symbols for edit :( 
---
Vlad Kozin <vladilen.ko...@gmail.com>



On Oct 31, 2013, at 11:58 AM, Vlad Kozin wrote:

> pls, ignore. Seems restarting emacs helped .. weird
> ---
> Vlad Kozin <vladilen.ko...@gmail.com>
> 
> 
> 
> On Oct 31, 2013, at 11:49 AM, Vlad Kozin wrote:
> 
>> Hi, I'm just copy pasting stuff I posted on IRC #geiser channel. Hope, 
>> somebody can provide assistance.
>> 
>>> <vkz> hi. I use geiser to work my way through some project written in guile
>>>       scheme. All files in the same directory, in fact in the same git
>>>       repo. All with ".scm" extensions. Yet for some files geiser-mode 
>>> doesn't
>>>       start. Even though the value of `geiser-implementations-alist' 
>>> correctly
>>>       maps .scm to guile. I can fix this by explicitly adding project dir to
>>>       geiser--alist of course, but something isn't right here. Also, M-. 
>>> fails
>>>       to find                                                           
>>> [11:25]
>>> <vkz> definitions in the the same project :(
>>> <vkz> geiser-implementations-alist (((regexp "\\.scm$") guile) ((regexp
>>>       "\\.ss$") racket) ((regexp "\\.rkt$") racket))                    
>>> [11:26]
>>> <vkz> 
>>> <vkz> would appreciate some assistance in fixing this. Particularly the
>>>       M-. missing stuff that's there. Without it I'll rgrep myself to the
>>>       grave :(                                                          
>>> [11:28]
>>> <vkz> oh, it seems geiser doesn't consult geiser-implementations-alist at
>>>       all. I just added the directory explicitly by running:            
>>> [11:44]
>>> <vkz>                                                                   
>>> [11:45]
>>> <vkz> (add-to-list 'geiser-implementations-alist
>>> <vkz>              '((dir "/Users/vkz/work/guile-scsh") guile))
>>> <vkz> and it still doesn't start on many scm files
>>> ERC> 
>> 
>> thanks
>> ---
>> Vlad Kozin <vladilen.ko...@gmail.com>
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

Reply via email to