GNU bug report logs - #36547
expect an earlier/clearer error when trying to splice(?) a function into a gexp

Previous Next

To reply to this bug, email your comments to 36547 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: Robert Vollmert <rob <at> vllmrt.net>
To: bug-guix <at> gnu.org
Subject: expect an earlier/clearer error when trying to splice(?) a function
 into a gexp
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 14:33:36 +0200

I tried to use a function in a gexp along the lines of

(define* (f x) …)

#~(begin
     (#$f x)
     …)

This resulted in the following error:

ERROR: In procedure primitive-load:
In procedure scm_lreadr: /gnu/store/wcw0fii855axkiqfz05283rwl7nlrb3i-puzzledb-blogs-job-builder:1:254: Unknown # object: #\<

where the referenced builder file contains

… (let ((backend (#<procedure read-secret (file)> "tools.token"))) …

It seems to me that whatever code writes the builder file should already complain at the point
where it substitutes #<procedure read-secret (file)> — is that possible?

Message #8 received at 36547 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Robert Vollmert <rob <at> vllmrt.net>
Cc: 36547 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#36547: expect an earlier/clearer error when trying to
 splice(?) a function into a gexp
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 18:06:52 +0200

Robert Vollmert <rob <at> vllmrt.net> skribis:

> I tried to use a function in a gexp along the lines of
>
> (define* (f x) …)
>
> #~(begin
>      (#$f x)
>      …)
>
> This resulted in the following error:
>
> ERROR: In procedure primitive-load:
> In procedure scm_lreadr: /gnu/store/wcw0fii855axkiqfz05283rwl7nlrb3i-puzzledb-blogs-job-builder:1:254: Unknown # object: #\<
>
> where the referenced builder file contains
>
> … (let ((backend (#<procedure read-secret (file)> "tools.token"))) …
>
> It seems to me that whatever code writes the builder file should already complain at the point
> where it substitutes #<procedure read-secret (file)> — is that possible?

I think ‘gexp->sexp’ should simply error out whenever an object that
lacks a read syntax (like a procedure) is inserted in a gexp.

Ludo’.

Previous Next

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