Re: multiply_vxx_const.set_k() in GR3.9 seems to be busticated?

It's a bug. The set_k() function has been left out of the pybind11 binding.

https://github.com/gnuradio/gnuradio/blob/master/gr-blocks/python/blocks/bindings/multiply_const_v_python.cc

On my system, I get a warning:

Exception in thread Thread-1:
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/lib/python3.6/threading.py", line 916, in _bootstrap_inner
    self.run()
  File "/usr/lib/python3.6/threading.py", line 864, in run
    self._target(*self._args, **self._kwargs)
  File "/home/ubuntu/xfer/multiply.py", line 87, in
_variable_function_probe_0_probe
    val =
self.blocks_multiply_const_vxx_0.set_k([1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1])
AttributeError: 'gnuradio.blocks.blocks_python.multiply_const_vcc'
object has no attribute 'set_k'

Ron

On 10/6/20 21:59, Marcus D Leech wrote:
> A vector is what I want and this works flawlessly in GR3.9
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Oct 7, 2020, at 12:57 AM, Ron Economos <w6rz@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> Try the "Fast Multiply Constant" block instead. The "Multiply Constant" block requires that the constant be a vector.
>>
>> Ron
>>
>>> On 10/6/20 21:08, Marcus D. Leech wrote:
>>> This is an apparent problem in 3.9.0.0-git
>>>
>>> In grc, create a multiply_const with a vector size > 1
>>>
>>> Have a function_probe block that sets the constant on a regular basis--perhaps from a variable, or a function call or the like.
>>>
>>> The constant will never be updated, even thought the function_probe setter is getting called. It's like the statement that contains the
>>> muitiply_const_vxx.set_k() is never even getting evaluated, because if the value inside the set_k is itself a function call, that function
>>> is never called.
>>>
>>> This caused me to pull my hair out (well, figuratively).
>>>
>>> Now the originating flow-graph .grc file originated from GR 3.7 but GRC 3.9 didn't appear to have any problem converting it and the
>>> generated python looks entirely valid. This is almost like Python3 is simply quietly ignoring the entire statement and I cannot
>>> understand why.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>