GNU bug report logs - #48098
let/ec compilation bug

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> igalia.com>
Cc: tracker <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#48098: closed (let/ec compilation bug)
Date: Sun, 02 May 2021 13:44:02 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Your message dated Sun, 02 May 2021 15:43:41 +0200
with message-id <87r1ipjlo2.fsf <at> igalia.com>
and subject line Re: bug#48098: let/ec compilation bug
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #48098,
regarding let/ec compilation bug
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs <at> gnu.org.)


-- 
48098: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=48098
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Stefan Israelsson Tampe <stefan.itampe <at> gmail.com>
To: bug-guile <at> gnu.org
Subject: let/ec compilation bug
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 12:48:55 +0200

[Message part 3 (text/plain, inline)]

Here is an interesting test case that shows that fi we define
(define-syntax-rule (letec-m f) (let/ec c (f c)))
(define                    (letec-f f) (let/ec c (f c)))

we can get two different behaviors with letec-m compiles wrongly.
Obviously a bug!

This is important in casy you would like to make a loop macro effectively
with a continue directive.

[Message part 4 (text/html, inline)]

[a.scm (text/x-scheme, attachment)]

[Message part 6 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> igalia.com>
To: Stefan Israelsson Tampe <stefan.itampe <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 48098-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#48098: let/ec compilation bug
Date: Sun, 02 May 2021 15:43:41 +0200

Thanks for the report; fixed!

On Thu 29 Apr 2021 12:48, Stefan Israelsson Tampe <stefan.itampe <at> gmail.com> writes:

> Here is an interesting test case that shows that fi we define
> (define-syntax-rule (letec-m f) (let/ec c (f c)))
> (define                    (letec-f f) (let/ec c (f c)))
>
> we can get two different behaviors with letec-m compiles wrongly. Obviously a bug!
>
> This is important in casy you would like to make a loop macro effectively with a continue directive.

Previous Next

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