GNU bug report logs - #52112
Compilation of macro returning record type fails

Previous Next

To reply to this bug, email your comments to 52112 AT debbugs.gnu.org.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Jean Abou Samra <jean <at> abou-samra.fr>
To: bug-guile <at> gnu.org
Subject: Compilation of macro returning record type fails
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2021 18:45:49 +0100

Record types are self-evaluating:

scheme@(guile-user)> (eval (make-record-type 'my-record '()) 
(current-module))
$1 = #<record-type my-record>

Yet, when a macro returns a record type, Guile fails
to byte-compile the code, even though the execution
(via the evaluator) works fine. Here is a simple example:


(define-macro (my-macro)
  (make-record-type 'my-record-2 '()))

(display (my-macro))
(newline)


Execution log:


$ guile --no-auto-compile test.scm
#<record-type my-record-2>

$ guile test.scm
;;; note: auto-compilation is enabled, set GUILE_AUTO_COMPILE=0
;;;       or pass the --no-auto-compile argument to disable.
;;; compiling /home/jean/test.scm
;;; WARNING: compilation of /home/jean/test.scm failed:
;;; unhandled constant #<record-type my-record-2>
#<record-type my-record-2>

This is with Guile version 3.0.5.130-5a1e7.

Message #8 received at 52112 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Taylan Kammer <taylan.kammer <at> gmail.com>
To: Jean Abou Samra <jean <at> abou-samra.fr>, 52112 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52112: Compilation of macro returning record type fails
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2021 19:54:36 +0100

On 25.11.2021 18:45, Jean Abou Samra wrote:
> Record types are self-evaluating:
> 
> scheme@(guile-user)> (eval (make-record-type 'my-record '()) (current-module))
> $1 = #<record-type my-record>
> 
> Yet, when a macro returns a record type, Guile fails
> to byte-compile the code, even though the execution
> (via the evaluator) works fine. Here is a simple example:
> 
> 
> (define-macro (my-macro)
>   (make-record-type 'my-record-2 '()))
> 
> (display (my-macro))
> (newline)
> 
> 
> Execution log:
> 
> 
> $ guile --no-auto-compile test.scm
> #<record-type my-record-2>
> 
> $ guile test.scm
> ;;; note: auto-compilation is enabled, set GUILE_AUTO_COMPILE=0
> ;;;       or pass the --no-auto-compile argument to disable.
> ;;; compiling /home/jean/test.scm
> ;;; WARNING: compilation of /home/jean/test.scm failed:
> ;;; unhandled constant #<record-type my-record-2>
> #<record-type my-record-2>
> 
> This is with Guile version 3.0.5.130-5a1e7.

I don't think that's supposed to work.  I find it surprising that
record-type objects are self-evaluating, and in any case they can't
be turned into bytecode.

Your macro could return code that evaluates to a record definition.
Would that solve your use-case?

-- 
Taylan

Message #11 received at 52112 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Jean Abou Samra <jean <at> abou-samra.fr>
To: Taylan Kammer <taylan.kammer <at> gmail.com>, 52112 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52112: Compilation of macro returning record type fails
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2021 20:02:39 +0100

Thanks for your reply.

Le 26/11/2021 à 19:54, Taylan Kammer a écrit :
> I don't think that's supposed to work.  I find it surprising that
> record-type objects are self-evaluating, and in any case they can't
> be turned into bytecode.
>
> Your macro could return code that evaluates to a record definition.
> Would that solve your use-case?


Yes, that is how I solved it in LilyPond
(https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/1026).

I was also somewhat surprised to see that
record types are self-evaluating. I don't
know where to check in R6RS what the expected
behavior would be. At any rate, it seems that
there is an inconsistency between the interpreter
and the compiler that would warrant resolving
either way.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.