GNU bug report logs - #18583
possibly buggy top level behavior in master

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 18583 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 18583 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

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

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

From: Daniel Llorens <daniel.llorens <at> bluewin.ch>
To: bug-guile <at> gnu.org
Subject: possibly buggy top level behavior in master
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 15:24:31 +0200

The following code:

(define-syntax define-lues
  (syntax-rules ()
    ((_ () exp)
     (call-with-values (lambda () exp) (lambda () 'unspecified)))
    ((_ (var . vars) exp)
     (begin
       (define var (call-with-values (lambda () exp) list))
       (define-lues vars (apply values (cdr var)))
       (define var (car var))))
    ((_ var exp)
     (define var (call-with-values (lambda () exp) list)))))

(define-lues (a) (values (make-vector 3 9)))
(vector-length a)

In 2.0, either pasting this in the REPL or (load "...") a file
containing this produces the expected result, 3.

In the current master (f7582), pasting in the REPL produces the
same result, but loading from a file this produces the error:

> In procedure vector-ref: Wrong type argument in position 1 (expecting vector): (#(9 9 9))

I'm aware of the workarounds, I'm reporting the behavior itself.

Regards,

	Daniel

Message #8 received at 18583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>
To: Daniel Llorens <daniel.llorens <at> bluewin.ch>
Cc: 18583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#18583: possibly buggy top level behavior in master
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 22:50:02 +0200

On Mon 29 Sep 2014 15:24, Daniel Llorens <daniel.llorens <at> bluewin.ch> writes:

> The following code:
>
> (define-syntax define-lues
>   (syntax-rules ()
>     ((_ () exp)
>      (call-with-values (lambda () exp) (lambda () 'unspecified)))
>     ((_ (var . vars) exp)
>      (begin
>        (define var (call-with-values (lambda () exp) list))
>        (define-lues vars (apply values (cdr var)))
>        (define var (car var))))
>     ((_ var exp)
>      (define var (call-with-values (lambda () exp) list)))))
>
> (define-lues (a) (values (make-vector 3 9)))
> (vector-length a)
>
> In 2.0, either pasting this in the REPL or (load "...") a file
> containing this produces the expected result, 3.
>
> In the current master (f7582), pasting in the REPL produces the
> same result, but loading from a file this produces the error:
>
>> In procedure vector-ref: Wrong type argument in position 1 (expecting vector): (#(9 9 9))
>
> I'm aware of the workarounds, I'm reporting the behavior itself.

Thank you thank you thank you for this report!

Incidentally it has a nice reduction, at the REPL or whereever:

  (begin
    (define x (list 1))
    (define x (car x))
    x)

Should be 1, Guile master was giving (1).  The reasons are a bug in the
effects analysis for the `define!' primitive.  I wonder how I didn't
catch this before!  Fixed in master, though sadly with a bytecode
version bump.

Andy

Message #13 received at 18583-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>
To: 18583-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#18583: possibly buggy top level behavior in master
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 22:51:17 +0200

thanks

Previous Next

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