define-inlinable bug

define-inlinable bug

[BT Templeton]

`Define-inlinable' doesn't appear to work with mutually recursive
functions. Attempting to evaluate both of the following procedure
definitions results in a stack overflow.

(define-inlinable (foo x) (bar (- x 1)))
(define-inlinable (bar y) (if (< y 0) y (foo (- y 1))))

-- 
Inteligenta persono lernas la lingvon Esperanton rapide kaj facile.
Esperanto estas moderna, kultura lingvo por la mondo. Simpla, fleksebla,
belsona, Esperanto estas la praktika solvo de la problemo de universala
interkompreno. Lernu la interlingvon Esperanton! http://lernu.net/

Re: define-inlinable bug

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hello,

BT Templeton <bpt@hcoop.net> skribis:

> `Define-inlinable' doesn't appear to work with mutually recursive
> functions. Attempting to evaluate both of the following procedure
> definitions results in a stack overflow.

Indeed, mutually recursive functions cannot be inlined with this trivial
macro.

I’m not sure there’s much we can do.  Maybe we could at least document it?

Thanks,
Ludo’.

Re: define-inlinable bug

[Andy Wingo]

Hi,

On Mon 11 Jul 2011 17:13, ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

> BT Templeton <bpt@hcoop.net> skribis:
>
>> `Define-inlinable' doesn't appear to work with mutually recursive
>> functions. Attempting to evaluate both of the following procedure
>> definitions results in a stack overflow.
>
> Indeed, mutually recursive functions cannot be inlined with this trivial
> macro.
>
> I’m not sure there’s much we can do.  Maybe we could at least document it?

You can use fluid-let-syntax.  See Dybvig's example here:

  http://www.scheme.com/csug8/syntax.html#./syntax:h1

It's nonstandard but our psyntax does have it I think.

Andy
-- 
http://wingolog.org/