Re: [Axiom-developer] clisp and sbcl

[Waldek Hebisch]

Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> Waldek Hebisch <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> | CY wrote:
> | > Confirmed - builds on sbcl and clisp.  Wow!  Thanks Waldek!
> | > 
> | > I don't know if it's important, but I am getting a lisp readout when
> | > using the integration package:
> | > 
> | > (2) -> integrate(sin(x),x)
> | > [loading messages]
> | > /home/cyapp/mathtoplevel/axiomtoplevel/testwork/wh-sandbox/target/i686-pc-
> | > linux/algebra/COMPLEX.fasl
> | >       for domain Complex
> | > 
> | > 
> | > ; in: LAMBDA NIL
> | > ;     (VMLISP:QCAR BOOT::|#1|)
> | > ; --> CAR
> | > ; ==>
> | > ;   (THE CONS BOOT::|#1|)
> | > ;
> | > ; caught WARNING:
> | > ;   undefined variable: |#1|
> | > 
> | 
> | AFAICS this comes because Axiom uses eval and sbcl by default
> | compiles all evals.  I am investigating whether the warning
> | indicate some real problem.  One can silence warning switching
> | to interpreted eval (which will be done for different reasons
> | in next revision):
> 
> There is a questionable habit in the Axiom core source code of
> defining variables through SETQ -- that tends to trigger warnings
> from several Lisp implementations.  Is it possible that the above
> is such a warning? (the |#1| are names for synthetized lambdas).
> 

The problem is more subtle: the code above (printed by sbcl)
references |#1|.  Apparently sbcl complier does not see that
|#1| is defined, but it is.  

In more detail, Axiom uses Lisp eval to replace |#1| by aproproate
value.  Relevant part of backtrace is:

17: (SB-INT:SIMPLE-EVAL-IN-LEXENV (EQCAR |#1| 0) #<NULL-LEXENV>)
18: (|evalSharpOne|
     (EQCAR |#1| 0)
     (0 (1 #(#(|cos| 1 (#)) ((# 0 . 1)) 2 4864) (1 0 . -1)) 0 . 1))
19: (|coerceUnion2Branch|
     ((|Union| (|Expression| (|Integer|)) (|List| (|Expression| (|Integer|))))
      WRAPPED 0 (1 #(#(|cos| 1 (#)) ((# 0 . 1)) 2 4864) (1 0 . -1)) 0 . 1))


|evalSharpOne| is defined as:

(defun |evalSharpOne| (x \#1) (declare (special \#1)) (EVAL x))

so at the time of eval |#1| has special binding.  My understanding is
that such bindings are visible to eval.  The '#<NULL-LEXENV>' part
made me suspicious, but testing indicate that in sbcl code works
as expected.  

-- 
                              Waldek Hebisch
address@hidden