GNU logs - #21944, boring messages

Message sent to bug-guile@HIDDEN:

Subject: bug#21944: Error on ordering of define-record-type and define-public in a module is unhelpful - possible improvement?
Resent-From: Koz Ross <koz.ross@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-guile@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 17:44:04 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.21944.B.144778221521961 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
To: 21944 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 21:27:13 +1300
From: Koz Ross <koz.ross@HIDDEN>
Message-Id: <20151117212713.48944f57195a04fd0a6c5d86@HIDDEN>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature";
 micalg="PGP-SHA256";
 boundary="Signature=_Tue__17_Nov_2015_21_27_13_+1300_q0EL2n7STj+eXrMj"
Precedence: list
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>

--Signature=_Tue__17_Nov_2015_21_27_13_+1300_q0EL2n7STj+eXrMj
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I have the following file, called foo.scm:

(define-module (koz foo)
 #:use-module (srfi srfi-9))

(define-public (make-empty-bar)
  (make-bar #f))

(define-record-type <bar>
  (make-bar open)
  bar?
  (open bar-open set-bar-open!))

I then also have this script test-foo.scm in the same directory:

#!/usr/bin/guile \
-L .. -s
!#

(use-modules (koz foo))
(define corner-bar (make-empty-bar))
(display corner-bar)
(newline)

After chmodding and trying to run test-foo.scm (with autocompilation enable=
d), I get a pile of error messages. After some testing, I discovered that i=
f the order of definitions in foo.scm is inverted (i.e. the define-record-t=
ype comes first), this problem does not occur and the script works fine. Ho=
wever, the errors received are extremely unhelpful:

Backtrace:
In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
 157: 8 [catch #t #<catch-closure 92abc0> ...]
In unknown file:
   ?: 7 [apply-smob/1 #<catch-closure 92abc0>]
In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
  63: 6 [call-with-prompt prompt0 ...]
In ice-9/eval.scm:
 432: 5 [eval # #]
In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
2401: 4 [save-module-excursion #<procedure 947880 at ice-9/boot-9.scm:4045:=
3 ()>]
4052: 3 [#<procedure 947880 at ice-9/boot-9.scm:4045:3 ()>]
In unknown file:
   ?: 2 [load-compiled/vm "/home/koz/.cache/guile/ccache/2.0-LE-8-2.0/home/=
koz/documents/programming/guile/koz/foo-test.scm.go"]
In /home/koz/documents/programming/guile/koz/./foo-test.scm:
   7: 1 [#<procedure d4a200 ()>]
In unknown file:
   ?: 0 [#<syntax-transformer make-empty-bar> #f 6 #f]

ERROR: In procedure #<syntax-transformer make-empty-bar>:
ERROR: Wrong type to apply: #<syntax-transformer make-empty-bar>

Would it be possible for the error message in this case to be a bit more he=
lpful? Even better, would it be possible to not make this an issue when com=
piling?
--=20
Koz Ross <koz.ross@HIDDEN>
www.retro-freedom.nz
If you aren't using GPG, you should be! https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en.
***
Please don't send me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org=
/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html for why.
***
Proud member of the Open Wireless Movement. Find out more at https://openwi=
reless.org/

--Signature=_Tue__17_Nov_2015_21_27_13_+1300_q0EL2n7STj+eXrMj
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWSuThAAoJEJARVr/lAw1A8YQH+gO15lcRA1DfkAe6Km3YY2FE
kyIEC2kKDMSR+zzDVOBOs9rmEs4HOVX0uxOieqPo/ABtd1C/SLayvycdVwzCcDV2
uR29eIneMEO1SYGMBt3F9TpxH2DFZyoPi9xjCXgHx7vhPS9PLZDgaJjcCWxfSp9A
/c7kyC8TAO5TDMw8QYNG0cdZqzrlcf/10ZOzsGtfh2vGUQ2PQjA5kn2VHdkC/yUk
zGu3oK/N7OyPGXGKex0RCGi6PJX6KVLuh9XI2NPBbvt776g+NhjSN+mieTfIZTMe
hDOVTKsjmVdA37OCacRmc8kGm7wejwGPkzInGZscQ5hA3s71G/JAPn2CatTG8BQ=
=Xa/z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Signature=_Tue__17_Nov_2015_21_27_13_+1300_q0EL2n7STj+eXrMj--

Message sent:

Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.503 (Entity 5.503)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
From: help-debbugs@HIDDEN (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Koz Ross <koz.ross@HIDDEN>
Subject: bug#21944: Acknowledgement (Error on ordering of define-record-type
 and define-public in a module is unhelpful - possible improvement?)
Message-ID: <handler.21944.B.144778221521961.ack <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
References: <20151117212713.48944f57195a04fd0a6c5d86@HIDDEN>
X-Gnu-PR-Message: ack 21944
X-Gnu-PR-Package: guile
Reply-To: 21944 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 17:44:04 +0000

Thank you for filing a new bug report with debbugs.gnu.org.

This is an automatically generated reply to let you know your message
has been received.

Your message is being forwarded to the package maintainers and other
interested parties for their attention; they will reply in due course.

Your message has been sent to the package maintainer(s):
 bug-guile@HIDDEN

If you wish to submit further information on this problem, please
send it to 21944 <at> debbugs.gnu.org.

Please do not send mail to help-debbugs@HIDDEN unless you wish
to report a problem with the Bug-tracking system.

--=20
21944: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D21944
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs@HIDDEN with problems

Message sent to bug-guile@HIDDEN:

Subject: bug#21944: Error on ordering of define-record-type and define-public in a module is unhelpful - possible improvement?
Resent-From: Andy Wingo <wingo@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-guile@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2016 21:08:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.21944.B21944.146697522519611 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
To: Koz Ross <koz.ross@HIDDEN>
Cc: 21944 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc
 :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version
 :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=ShS7Bt
 U/YIw9lwdvIRActj6MQ2xQtLA5kp3SoXmR7mjchzhsrISBr0X2WiI8PMGeDrzG7G
 kSYtNfca98ED28eFkjPKT9RwQFHOF3t3My+Ev7bPTyzHpnjz5jYsuIOb+3e2fROw
 pd2TxnaNqA5Rnih2dhjLbj/L3bQwUlF78WzGo=
From: Andy Wingo <wingo@HIDDEN>
References: <20151117212713.48944f57195a04fd0a6c5d86@HIDDEN>
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2016 23:06:48 +0200
In-Reply-To: <20151117212713.48944f57195a04fd0a6c5d86@HIDDEN> (Koz
 Ross's message of "Tue, 17 Nov 2015 21:27:13 +1300")
Message-ID: <871t3jbqxj.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: list
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>

On Tue 17 Nov 2015 09:27, Koz Ross <koz.ross@HIDDEN> writes:

> I have the following file, called foo.scm:
>
> (define-module (koz foo)
>  #:use-module (srfi srfi-9))
>
> (define-public (make-empty-bar)
>   (make-bar #f))
>
> (define-record-type <bar>
>   (make-bar open)
>   bar?
>   (open bar-open set-bar-open!))

> Would it be possible for the error message in this case to be a bit
> more helpful? Even better, would it be possible to not make this an
> issue when compiling?

It would be possible to make the scope of make-bar be the whole file.
In theory it should work I guess, given this news entry from 2.0.1:

  ** `begin' expands macros in its body before other expressions

  This enables support for programs like the following:

      (begin
        (define even?
          (lambda (x)
            (or (=3D x 0) (odd? (- x 1)))))
        (define-syntax odd?
          (syntax-rules ()
            ((odd? x) (not (even? x)))))
        (even? 10))

And indeed if I try something at the REPL that uses `begin' I can't
reproduce this sort of error.  Hmmmm.  Maybe this rings a bell with
Mark.

In the mean-time I added a warning:

  wingo@clucks:~/src/guile$ meta/guile --fresh-auto-compile /tmp/foo.scm
  ;;; note: auto-compilation is enabled, set GUILE_AUTO_COMPILE=3D0
  ;;;       or pass the --no-auto-compile argument to disable.
  ;;; compiling /tmp/foo.scm
  ;;; /tmp/foo.scm:4:2: warning: macro `make-bar' used before definition
  ;;; compiled /home/wingo/src/guile/cache/guile/ccache/2.2-LE-8-3.9/tmp/fo=
o.scm.go
  Backtrace:
             5 (apply-smob/1 #<catch-closure fcac00>)
  In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
      704:2  4 (call-with-prompt _ _ #<procedure default-prompt-handle=E2=
=80=A6>)
  In ice-9/eval.scm:
      608:8  3 (_ #(#(#<directory (guile-user) fd1f30>)))
  In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
     2325:4  2 (save-module-excursion _)
    3829:12  1 (_)
  In unknown file:
             0 (_ #f)

  ERROR: ERROR: Wrong type to apply: #<syntax-transformer make-bar>

OK the error is terrible, but at least the warning tells you why the
later error is terrible.

I haven't been able to backport it to 2.0 yet though.  But maybe the
warning is useless if we can fix the issue.

Andy

Message sent to bug-guile@HIDDEN:

Subject: bug#21944: Error on ordering of define-record-type and define-public in a module is unhelpful - possible improvement?
Resent-From: Andy Wingo <wingo@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-guile@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 08:03:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.21944.B21944.146701456831829 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
To: Koz Ross <koz.ross@HIDDEN>
Cc: mhw@HIDDEN, ludo@HIDDEN, 21944 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc
 :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version
 :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=omussl3hElY0+4uqH3XCBfF87WxXNrzs
 vj/s5LKwTojEtoEN5Cp5vWKK8yBcrnTm/3aaBxuwFaDTWG+0se3JP66FAx675fH9
 F6r2F64hgpLl67dFQLqsVLii3SMUscAGYrFriNvR/wCAz2RxCnZSC/3mZX3AGoZM
 JNx0OTCe7cg=
From: Andy Wingo <wingo@HIDDEN>
References: <20151117212713.48944f57195a04fd0a6c5d86@HIDDEN>
 <871t3jbqxj.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 10:02:37 +0200
In-Reply-To: <871t3jbqxj.fsf@HIDDEN> (Andy Wingo's message of "Sun, 26 Jun
 2016 23:06:48 +0200")
Message-ID: <874m8f9i02.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: list
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>

On Sun 26 Jun 2016 23:06, Andy Wingo <wingo@HIDDEN> writes:

> On Tue 17 Nov 2015 09:27, Koz Ross <koz.ross@HIDDEN> writes:
>
>> I have the following file, called foo.scm:
>>
>> (define-module (koz foo)
>>  #:use-module (srfi srfi-9))
>>
>> (define-public (make-empty-bar)
>>   (make-bar #f))
>>
>> (define-record-type <bar>
>>   (make-bar open)
>>   bar?
>>   (open bar-open set-bar-open!))
>
>> Would it be possible for the error message in this case to be a bit
>> more helpful? Even better, would it be possible to not make this an
>> issue when compiling?
>
> It would be possible to make the scope of make-bar be the whole file.
> In theory it should work I guess, given this news entry from 2.0.1:
>
>   ** `begin' expands macros in its body before other expressions

Apparently the reason this doesn't work in Guile right now is that the
compiler currently reads and compiles one Scheme expression at a time,
then stitches them together on the Tree-IL level.  Incidentally,
`primitive-load' works in the same way for the interpreter: it reads and
eval's single expressions in a loop.  We could change this to have Guile
read the whole file and pass it all to the expander at once, within a
`begin'.  This has some user-visible changes though:

  * if evaluating an expression throws an error, primitive-load doesn't
    read the following expressions and so doesn't detect syntax errors;
    try a file like this:

    (error "what")
    )

    With the interpreter (primitive-load) you will get the "what" error,
    not a syntax error.  (Yes the unclosed paren hurts my eyeballs but I
    wanted to demonstrate a syntax error.  Here's a matching paren:
    ")".)

  * Procedural macros won't be able to use bindings defined previously
    in the file unless they are eval-whenned.  Of course this already
    breaks in the compiler, but it succeeds in the interpreter.

Maybe now is a good time to do this though, in 2.2.  Ludovic, Mark:
thoughts?

Andy

Message sent to bug-guile@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#21944: Error on ordering of define-record-type and define-public in a module is unhelpful - possible improvement?
Resent-From: Andy Wingo <wingo@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-guile@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 08:34:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.21944.B21944.14670163902813 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 21944
X-GNU-PR-Package: guile
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Koz Ross <koz.ross@HIDDEN>
Cc: ludo@HIDDEN, 21944 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 21944-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B21944.14670163902813
          (code B ref 21944); Mon, 27 Jun 2016 08:34:01 +0000
Received: (at 21944) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Jun 2016 08:33:10 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57452 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bHRyg-0000jI-1Z
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 04:33:10 -0400
Received: from pb-sasl1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.66]:52399
 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <wingo@HIDDEN>) id 1bHRye-0000jB-Rv
 for 21944 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 04:33:09 -0400
Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1])
 by pb-sasl1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99D882095B;
 Mon, 27 Jun 2016 04:33:07 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc
 :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version
 :content-type; s=sasl; bh=UPckrCc6W9B7v1DtJHQKkqt98Vo=; b=DqQmX4
 dFD5yaE5ZB5iYqAKnk/XxEt9vfbW4XebXnyfl/52Z77RgELuiEVh/hzlv4r6/k8a
 fOHhVh/FoEYkGA92qHy12pCKGp/C61nEnskj941FlAsyJogtisEGnTSLWG1IXsra
 iIHhsGnwPzsfAvvFDlTw9qH836Pow+mYAvk+w=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc
 :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version
 :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=SFZnhEGOKs4EnZn1oMB8n64wHk5wMdcG
 NxMvDz9XRGR/6Ll4xqoNzWFea1ocuglNPe3BAGtUKVjm5l9cLRYyi3tqSjwirlwf
 xOktEDdEjl0nQ3TBu+p2f9+29MvESIqR15gx6LoFZZ3Tx1+DzaubACmE/K84vM+i
 tJDqGWhABf8=
Received: from pb-sasl1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1])
 by pb-sasl1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91EF72095A;
 Mon, 27 Jun 2016 04:33:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from clucks (unknown [88.160.190.192])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by pb-sasl1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DBB8720959;
 Mon, 27 Jun 2016 04:33:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: Andy Wingo <wingo@HIDDEN>
References: <20151117212713.48944f57195a04fd0a6c5d86@HIDDEN>
 <871t3jbqxj.fsf@HIDDEN> <874m8f9i02.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 10:32:59 +0200
In-Reply-To: <874m8f9i02.fsf@HIDDEN> (Andy Wingo's message of "Mon, 27 Jun
 2016 10:02:37 +0200")
Message-ID: <87inwv8210.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Pobox-Relay-ID: C5C90452-3C41-11E6-A10E-C1836462E9F6-02397024!pb-sasl1.pobox.com
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)

On Mon 27 Jun 2016 10:02, Andy Wingo <wingo@HIDDEN> writes:

> Apparently the reason this doesn't work in Guile right now is that the
> compiler currently reads and compiles one Scheme expression at a time,
> then stitches them together on the Tree-IL level.  Incidentally,
> `primitive-load' works in the same way for the interpreter: it reads and
> eval's single expressions in a loop.  We could change this to have Guile
> read the whole file and pass it all to the expander at once, within a
> `begin'.  This has some user-visible changes though:
>
>   * if evaluating an expression throws an error, primitive-load doesn't
>     read the following expressions and so doesn't detect syntax errors;
>     try a file like this:
>
>     (error "what")
>     )
>
>     With the interpreter (primitive-load) you will get the "what" error,
>     not a syntax error.  (Yes the unclosed paren hurts my eyeballs but I
>     wanted to demonstrate a syntax error.  Here's a matching paren:
>     ")".)
>
>   * Procedural macros won't be able to use bindings defined previously
>     in the file unless they are eval-whenned.  Of course this already
>     breaks in the compiler, but it succeeds in the interpreter.

Another user-visible change: changes to read-options would not take
effect in the same places.

Andy

Message sent to bug-guile@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#21944: Error on ordering of define-record-type and define-public in a module is unhelpful - possible improvement?
Resent-From: Mark H Weaver <mhw@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-guile@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 16:11:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.21944.B21944.146704383231917 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 21944
X-GNU-PR-Package: guile
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Andy Wingo <wingo@HIDDEN>
Cc: ludo@HIDDEN, Koz Ross <koz.ross@HIDDEN>, 21944 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 21944-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B21944.146704383231917
          (code B ref 21944); Mon, 27 Jun 2016 16:11:02 +0000
Received: (at 21944) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Jun 2016 16:10:32 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58436 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bHZ7H-0008Ii-My
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 12:10:31 -0400
Received: from world.peace.net ([50.252.239.5]:34675)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <mhw@HIDDEN>) id 1bHZ7E-0008IP-US
 for 21944 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 12:10:29 -0400
Received: from pool-71-174-35-80.bstnma.east.verizon.net ([71.174.35.80]
 helo=jojen)
 by world.peace.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
 (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <mhw@HIDDEN>)
 id 1bHZ78-0003IM-KX; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 12:10:22 -0400
From: Mark H Weaver <mhw@HIDDEN>
References: <20151117212713.48944f57195a04fd0a6c5d86@HIDDEN>
 <871t3jbqxj.fsf@HIDDEN> <874m8f9i02.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 12:10:08 -0400
In-Reply-To: <874m8f9i02.fsf@HIDDEN> (Andy Wingo's message of "Mon, 27 Jun
 2016 10:02:37 +0200")
Message-ID: <87eg7ia9zz.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.95 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)

Andy Wingo <wingo@HIDDEN> writes:

> On Sun 26 Jun 2016 23:06, Andy Wingo <wingo@HIDDEN> writes:
>
>> On Tue 17 Nov 2015 09:27, Koz Ross <koz.ross@HIDDEN> writes:
>>
>>> I have the following file, called foo.scm:
>>>
>>> (define-module (koz foo)
>>>  #:use-module (srfi srfi-9))
>>>
>>> (define-public (make-empty-bar)
>>>   (make-bar #f))
>>>
>>> (define-record-type <bar>
>>>   (make-bar open)
>>>   bar?
>>>   (open bar-open set-bar-open!))
>>
>>> Would it be possible for the error message in this case to be a bit
>>> more helpful? Even better, would it be possible to not make this an
>>> issue when compiling?
>>
>> It would be possible to make the scope of make-bar be the whole file.
>> In theory it should work I guess, given this news entry from 2.0.1:
>>
>>   ** `begin' expands macros in its body before other expressions
>
> Apparently the reason this doesn't work in Guile right now is that the
> compiler currently reads and compiles one Scheme expression at a time,
> then stitches them together on the Tree-IL level.  Incidentally,
> `primitive-load' works in the same way for the interpreter: it reads and
> eval's single expressions in a loop.  We could change this to have Guile
> read the whole file and pass it all to the expander at once, within a
> `begin'.  This has some user-visible changes though:
>
>   * if evaluating an expression throws an error, primitive-load doesn't
>     read the following expressions and so doesn't detect syntax errors;
>     try a file like this:
>
>     (error "what")
>     )
>
>     With the interpreter (primitive-load) you will get the "what" error,
>     not a syntax error.  (Yes the unclosed paren hurts my eyeballs but I
>     wanted to demonstrate a syntax error.  Here's a matching paren:
>     ")".)
>
>   * Procedural macros won't be able to use bindings defined previously
>     in the file unless they are eval-whenned.  Of course this already
>     breaks in the compiler, but it succeeds in the interpreter.

Another problem is that in several places, we assume that if a top-level
form calls 'set-current-module', the forms that follow in the file will
now be expanded within that new module.  This behavior is needed for
'define-module' to work properly, and it's also assumed in boot-9.scm,
psyntax-pp.scm, and maybe some other places.

      Mark

Message sent to bug-guile@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#21944: Error on ordering of define-record-type and define-public in a module is unhelpful - possible improvement?
Resent-From: Andy Wingo <wingo@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-guile@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 21:23:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.21944.B21944.146706257113946 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 21944
X-GNU-PR-Package: guile
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Mark H Weaver <mhw@HIDDEN>
Cc: ludo@HIDDEN, Koz Ross <koz.ross@HIDDEN>, 21944 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 21944-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B21944.146706257113946
          (code B ref 21944); Mon, 27 Jun 2016 21:23:02 +0000
Received: (at 21944) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Jun 2016 21:22:51 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58543 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bHdzX-0003cs-7P
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 17:22:51 -0400
Received: from pb-sasl2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.67]:54309
 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <wingo@HIDDEN>) id 1bHdzV-0003cj-B9
 for 21944 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 17:22:49 -0400
Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1])
 by pb-sasl2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC88C25F18;
 Mon, 27 Jun 2016 17:22:47 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc
 :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version
 :content-type; s=sasl; bh=fu9Dkf1XVh/7VOMknEegNZdksHY=; b=JUx8oP
 +3iMh88SjoMzS4Jtgi/6I36YQ5PmPkkeYyAhqsyeM4ATbTY5Zq8kvA25NeLUS04s
 mi4N3JGf4fu6Z1qFIxQhih4mOPwU3hFRkh3TYZSHZNQbsoy3ZfR/ljkTtocxK5vY
 RRnXndBApn2gP72RlN8CCcJQBvo+ltkumyvbc=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc
 :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version
 :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=TI6CenjLqmmSXDK11WuVHklHUw6w1jtL
 vfLOxN4NXN0trctjFuMZwUnochRuoIIenYTcO1fq2b1tFiA2/yCMn2Qf9eJ1HJdp
 5KwlDFr4eD1PkJlIVRxY34y3L2SOn0aGPef6n7lRShnn1uDbek9LBZFzR11fA/y/
 cn53WVeCCCg=
Received: from pb-sasl2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1])
 by pb-sasl2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FE3F25F15;
 Mon, 27 Jun 2016 17:22:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from clucks (unknown [88.160.190.192])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by pb-sasl2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3F19B25F14;
 Mon, 27 Jun 2016 17:22:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: Andy Wingo <wingo@HIDDEN>
References: <20151117212713.48944f57195a04fd0a6c5d86@HIDDEN>
 <871t3jbqxj.fsf@HIDDEN> <874m8f9i02.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <87eg7ia9zz.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 23:22:29 +0200
In-Reply-To: <87eg7ia9zz.fsf@HIDDEN> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Mon, 27
 Jun 2016 12:10:08 -0400")
Message-ID: <87eg7i8gyy.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 47F471D0-3CAD-11E6-A4CC-28A6F1301B6D-02397024!pb-sasl2.pobox.com
X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-)

On Mon 27 Jun 2016 18:10, Mark H Weaver <mhw@HIDDEN> writes:

>>   * if evaluating an expression throws an error, primitive-load doesn't
>>     read the following expressions and so doesn't detect syntax errors;
>>     try a file like this:
>>
>>     (error "what")
>>     )
>>
>>     With the interpreter (primitive-load) you will get the "what" error,
>>     not a syntax error.  (Yes the unclosed paren hurts my eyeballs but I
>>     wanted to demonstrate a syntax error.  Here's a matching paren:
>>     ")".)
>>
>>   * Procedural macros won't be able to use bindings defined previously
>>     in the file unless they are eval-whenned.  Of course this already
>>     breaks in the compiler, but it succeeds in the interpreter.
>
> Another problem is that in several places, we assume that if a top-level
> form calls 'set-current-module', the forms that follow in the file will
> now be expanded within that new module.  This behavior is needed for
> 'define-module' to work properly, and it's also assumed in boot-9.scm,
> psyntax-pp.scm, and maybe some other places.

I think I fixed this in a reasonable way in master; or, reasonable given
the historical mess that this all is anyway :) Your thoughts welcome
here.

If I did manage to fix that, then the remaining problems are the ones
that I mention, plus reader options which I mentioned in another mail.
I think probably reader options are the only significant issue.  WDYT?

Andy

Last modified: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 12:00:02 UTC

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.