{"action":"closed","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/maths/moodle-qtype_stack/issues/231","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/maths/moodle-qtype_stack","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/maths/moodle-qtype_stack/issues/231/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/maths/moodle-qtype_stack/issues/231/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/maths/moodle-qtype_stack/issues/231/events","html_url":"https://github.com/maths/moodle-qtype_stack/issues/231","id":173386377,"number":231,"title":"Lambdas broken...","user":{"login":"aharjula","id":980957,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/980957?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/aharjula","html_url":"https://github.com/aharjula","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aharjula/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aharjula/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aharjula/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aharjula/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aharjula/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aharjula/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aharjula/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aharjula/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aharjula/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"closed","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":10,"created_at":"2016-08-26T07:22:54Z","updated_at":"2016-09-26T13:45:13Z","closed_at":"2016-09-26T13:45:13Z","body":"Hi,\r\n\r\nA new issue appeared as people start to go through less common stuff with the upgraded abacus-branch that includes this commit: https://github.com/maths/moodle-qtype_stack/commit/d58c8fbea00eb590f2ad3d6ca5f7f0180a356da3\r\n\r\nIt seems like that subscript logic has trouble with unevaluated things that exist in lambdas? Maybe even elsewhere... Seems to want to evaluate things that can not be evaluated i.e., the recursion runs too deep and probably needs more complex termination rules.\r\n\r\nAny idea what is happening and if there is a workaround that does not require switching lambdas to something else?\r\n\r\nThis may prove to be a major issue and I am trying to track down examples, but we have major authors that like lambdas... and have liked them from STACK 1 times.\r\n\r\nSnip from a cas-chat debug:\r\n```\r\n], key = [ \r\ntestLambda \r\n] \r\n, value = [ \r\nlambda([a],block([out],out:[],for i thru length(a) do out:append(out,[first(listify(setdifference(setify(a),setify(out))))]),out))\r\n  \r\n], display = [ \r\nlength: argument cannot be a symbol; found a\r\n#0: stack_disp_strip_number(ex=length(a))(stackmaxima.mac line 321)\r\n#1: stack_disp_strip_number(ex=for i thru length(a) do out:append(out,[first(listify(setdifference(setify(a),setify(out))))]))\r\n#2: stack_disp_strip_number(ex=block([out],out:[],for i thru length(a) do out:append(out,[first(listify(setdifference(setify(a),set...)\r\n```"}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"sangwinc"}}