From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Apr 19 22:21:37 2015 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Apr 2015 02:21:37 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:32824 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Yk1L7-0007hX-0V for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 19 Apr 2015 22:21:37 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:41179) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Yk1L4-0007hJ-PC for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 19 Apr 2015 22:21:35 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Yk1Ky-000193-T8 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 19 Apr 2015 22:21:29 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50 autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::11]:33353) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Yk1Ky-00018s-QE for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 19 Apr 2015 22:21:28 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54686) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Yk1Kx-0001ZK-Vy for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Apr 2015 22:21:28 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Yk1Ks-00018C-UU for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Apr 2015 22:21:27 -0400 Received: from vms173023pub.verizon.net ([206.46.173.23]:62267) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Yk1Ks-000184-PN for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Apr 2015 22:21:22 -0400 Received: from [192.168.2.127] ([71.108.232.105]) by vms173023.mailsrvcs.net (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.32.0 64bit (built Jul 16 2014)) with ESMTPA id <0NN3009CK2IX7C00@vms173023.mailsrvcs.net> for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Apr 2015 21:21:02 -0500 (CDT) X-CMAE-Score: 0 X-CMAE-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=W6aPjqSh c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=DzMJcvY2lw5imkaMSwaKpg==:117 a=eIhxMilvRf8A:10 a=N659UExz7-8A:10 a=oR5dmqMzAAAA:8 a=-9mUelKeXuEA:10 a=e9J7MTPGsLIA:10 a=AqKfAlRkZTMMLWp64ZYA:9 a=pILNOxqGKmIA:10 From: Matt Wette Content-type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Subject: doc. error in v 2.0.11, Section 7.6.2.5 Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2015 19:20:57 -0700 Message-id: <89A136F3-5E08-4BC7-BC7A-9021B65598ED@alumni.caltech.edu> To: bug-guile@gnu.org MIME-version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::11 X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: mwette@alumni.caltech.edu X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) The reference manual for guile 2.0.11 has an error in Section 7.6.2.5 = on rnrs lists. The statement "identical to the fold ..." is not quite = correct. The section says: fold-left combine nil list1 list2 . . . [Scheme Procedure] fold-right = combine nil list1 list2 . . . [Scheme Procedure] These procedures are = identical to the fold and fold-right procedures provided by SRFI-1. See = Section 7.5.3.5 [SRFI-1 Fold and Map], page 556, for documentation.=20 In section 7.5.3.5, the manual says: (fold cons =92() =92(1 2 3)) [...] (3 2 1) But, fold-left does not work like fold: the arguments to the procedure = to fold-left are reversed with respect to fold:. guile i2.0.11correctly gives the following: (fold-left cons '() '(1 2 3)) =3D> (((() . 1) . 2) . 3) (fold-left xcons '() '(1 2 3)) =3D> (3 2 1) Matt From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jun 23 16:07:39 2016 Received: (at 20375-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Jun 2016 20:07:40 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53017 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bGAuZ-0005OL-LR for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 16:07:39 -0400 Received: from pb-sasl2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.67]:63992 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bGAuX-0005OE-VN for 20375-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 16:07:38 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-sasl2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B96B62455C; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 16:07:36 -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:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=Sp+ZcLlAjrmG 94+puTNap7MOuos=; b=L1h3SntblBwUNYsvW1OvsAeJdDULyvtpMj10cANoBpdH bLx4vDrQUAq0PXFLqb49t5A0NzFDh0nVUP4Kwfarn1XXd4xKcENm5NkeSueF3Y7C zpdL82XUyymeZPMGWok34xDX+il1+AYt/xALjJM4X2e7rpWjl3eeTHh5RCLoS5w= 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=PH+xOC irxiawetP6WHrlMpujlV54DaXEbebQQKa96WrlVRtjPShD8EzRzMwBPg+j0l7xHA GWq8KpubCZL9OEeE2FmjJXqYfZt96HTCq3vNAyELP5GfMXbmKiorM4FynJpBk8rM hDLbjJGkTGPpCbKpak2+W7ui0NDo+kq/tThtY= Received: from pb-sasl2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-sasl2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2A2624557; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 16:07:36 -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 9A61224556; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 16:07:35 -0400 (EDT) From: Andy Wingo To: Matt Wette Subject: Re: bug#20375: doc. error in v 2.0.11, Section 7.6.2.5 References: <89A136F3-5E08-4BC7-BC7A-9021B65598ED@alumni.caltech.edu> Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 22:07:26 +0200 In-Reply-To: <89A136F3-5E08-4BC7-BC7A-9021B65598ED@alumni.caltech.edu> (Matt Wette's message of "Sun, 19 Apr 2015 19:20:57 -0700") Message-ID: <87mvmblldt.fsf@pobox.com> 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 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 20CD3D44-397E-11E6-8614-28A6F1301B6D-02397024!pb-sasl2.pobox.com X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 20375-done Cc: 20375-done@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-) On Mon 20 Apr 2015 04:20, Matt Wette writes: > The reference manual for guile 2.0.11 has an error in Section 7.6.2.5 > on rnrs lists. The statement "identical to the fold ..." is not quite > correct. The section says: > > fold-left combine nil list1 list2 . . . [Scheme Procedure] fold-right > combine nil list1 list2 . . . [Scheme Procedure] These procedures are > identical to the fold and fold-right procedures provided by > SRFI-1. See Section 7.5.3.5 [SRFI-1 Fold and Map], page 556, for > documentation. > > > In section 7.5.3.5, the manual says: > (fold cons =E2=80=99() =E2=80=99(1 2 3)) [...] (3 2 1) > > > But, fold-left does not work like fold: the arguments to the procedure to= fold-left are reversed with respect to fold:. > > guile i2.0.11correctly gives the following: > > (fold-left cons '() '(1 2 3)) =3D> (((() . 1) . 2) . 3) > > (fold-left xcons '() '(1 2 3)) =3D> (3 2 1) Gah, you're right. What a mess. Fixed in master, will backport soonish. Andy From unknown Mon Jun 23 07:49:18 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 11:24:05 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator