Re: '#:optional' in Scheme function documentation looks weird

[Jean Abou Samra]

Le 09/08/2021 à 16:21, David Kastrup a écrit :
> Werner LEMBERG <wl@gnu.org> writes:
>
> > > > In `notation.pdf`, section 'A.23, Scheme functions', the function
> > > > header
> > > >
> > > >    (define-safe-public (check-context-path path #:optional location)
> > > >
> > > > gets currently translated to
> > > >
> > > >    check-context-path path . lambda*:G59
> > A quick work-around is to use Guile 2.x, as Jean has reported in
> > !808...
> Is that actually better?  Last time I had contact with Guile-2.x in that
> respect, it replaced the argument lists by generic a b c d . That would
> be different here?

It would appear that Guile 2.2 mangles the argument
lists when not byte-compiling.

No, I'm not particularly proud of having introduced
code that depends on auto-compilation. Didn't notice.


> > > How many of those do we have?
> > About a dozen.
> >
> > > One could redefine them manually, giving
> > >
> > > check-context-path path . optional-location
> > >
> > > or similar.
> > Could you take care of that?
> It would be sort of a crutch.
>
> > > It's also conveivable that define-safe-public could funnel off the
> > > argument list into the documentation string before it gets replaced:
> > > I remember doing something like that for markup commands since
> > > Guile-2.x did not retain the argument lists.
> > Sounds promising.  Again, could you take care of that?
> I'll take a look at what's happening here.  But again: Guile-2.x is
> supposed to be better in that respect?  I find that surprising.


It is better when you use it the way their developers
want you to use it. Error locations are another thing
that is broken without compilation.

Sigh.