[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix #1620 by ignoring captured state of re

From: megane
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix #1620 by ignoring captured state of replaced variables
Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2019 22:48:24 +0300
User-agent: mu4e 1.0; emacs 25.1.1

megane <address@hidden> writes:

> Peter Bex <address@hidden> writes:
>> On Wed, Jul 03, 2019 at 02:05:21PM +0200, Peter Bex wrote:
>>> You're right, good catch!  That was an oversight on my part, I only
>>> removed the captured check of the other variable.  I hope this makes
>>> things faster in more cases.  I can make and test a new patch, but don't
>>> know when I'll get around to it.  Possibly in the weekend.
>> I tried this, but I got a crash when compiling CHICKEN with itself after
>> having built it with this patch.
> Do you mean you tried with the '(not captured)' check removed?
>> I'm not even sure why it's doing this.  The offending procedure was
>> append-map from mini-srfi-1, it's calling proc with the wrong number
>> of arguments.
> There's this in the definition of append-map:
> (define (append-map proc lst1 . lsts)
>   ...
>   (append (proc x) r)
>            ^^^^
>            Calling proc with 1 argument
> The error was:
> Error: mini-srfi-1.scm:72: proc: procedure `proc' called with wrong number of 
> arguments
> rules.make:831: recipe for target 'chicken-ffi-syntax.c' failed
> In chicken-ffi-syntax.scm in the definition for let-syntax there's this:
>        (append-map
>         (lambda (b a)
>              ^^^^
>              This expects 2 arguments!!!
>           (if (pair? (cddr b))
>               (list (cons a (cddr b)))
>               '() ) )
>               bindings aliases)

Sorry, ignore the above.. I wasn't thinking about what append-map was supposed
to do..

I'll take a closer look after some sleep.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]