GNU bug report logs -
#73984
Compiler/interpreter doesn't handle the macro defined after it's used
Previous Next
To reply to this bug, email your comments to 73984 AT debbugs.gnu.org.
Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.
Report forwarded
to
bug-guile <at> gnu.org
:
bug#73984
; Package
guile
.
(Thu, 24 Oct 2024 12:47:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sent
to
Artyom Bologov <mail <at> aartaka.me>
:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to
bug-guile <at> gnu.org
.
(Thu, 24 Oct 2024 12:47:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hello y'all,
So I'm working on a project with a moderate amount of macros and some
tangled code paths. Which often means I have non-linear and
hard-to-figure-out inter-dependencies between pieces of code. One of
them bit me today: a macro that was defined after a procedure it was
used in, resulted in an "Unbound variable" error when the procedure was
called. The procedure was called long after the macro was finally
defined, so it shouldn't have been a problem. Find the test file
attached and use it as:
```
GUILE_LOAD_PATH=.:$GUILE_LOAD_PATH guile
scheme@(guile-user)> (use-modules (test))
;;; note: source file ./test.scm
;;; newer than compiled /.../test.scm.go
;;; note: auto-compilation is enabled, set GUILE_AUTO_COMPILE=0
;;; or pass the --no-auto-compile argument to disable.
;;; compiling ./test.scm
;;; test.scm:7:5: warning: possibly unbound variable `a'
;;; test.scm:8:5: warning: possibly unbound variable `b'
;;; compiled /.../test.scm.go
scheme@(guile-user)> (testing)
;; ice-9/boot-9.scm:1685:16: In procedure raise-exception:
;; Unbound variable: a
;; ...
```
[test.scm (text/plain, attachment)]
[Message part 3 (text/plain, inline)]
The expected behavior is that both "a" and "b" are defined and macro
expanded during compilation, regardless of whether it was defined before
or after use.
I'm not sure if that's a valid bug, but here you go anyway.
Best of love,
--
Artyom Bologov
https://aartaka.me
Information forwarded
to
bug-guile <at> gnu.org
:
bug#73984
; Package
guile
.
(Thu, 24 Oct 2024 14:52:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #8 received at 73984 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hi Artyom,
On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 8:47 AM Artyom Bologov <mail <at> aartaka.me> wrote:
>
> Hello y'all,
>
> So I'm working on a project with a moderate amount of macros and some
> tangled code paths. Which often means I have non-linear and
> hard-to-figure-out inter-dependencies between pieces of code. One of
> them bit me today: a macro that was defined after a procedure it was
> used in, resulted in an "Unbound variable" error when the procedure was
> called. The procedure was called long after the macro was finally
> defined, so it shouldn't have been a problem.
I don't think this is a bug. In my experience, macro definitions must
precede uses.
- Dave
Information forwarded
to
bug-guile <at> gnu.org
:
bug#73984
; Package
guile
.
(Thu, 24 Oct 2024 15:14:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #11 received at 73984 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hi David,
> I don't think this is a bug. In my experience, macro definitions must
> precede uses.
This is a sane answer too!
Thanks,
--
Artyom Bologov
https://aartaka.me
This bug report was last modified 289 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.