From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.bugs Subject: bug#48098: let/ec compilation bug Date: Sun, 02 May 2021 15:43:41 +0200 Message-ID: <87r1ipjlo2.fsf@igalia.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="24114"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) Cc: 48098-done@debbugs.gnu.org To: Stefan Israelsson Tampe Original-X-From: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun May 02 15:44:10 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-bugs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ldCOH-00064q-8E for guile-bugs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 02 May 2021 15:44:09 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38322 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ldCOG-0000Cj-BZ for guile-bugs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 02 May 2021 09:44:08 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42866) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ldCOA-0000Ao-Rh for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sun, 02 May 2021 09:44:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:59577) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ldCOA-0002Uv-KV for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sun, 02 May 2021 09:44:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ldCOA-0003F0-Ik for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sun, 02 May 2021 09:44:02 -0400 Resent-From: Andy Wingo Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-To: bug-guile@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 02 May 2021 13:44:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: cc-closed 48098 X-GNU-PR-Package: guile Mail-Followup-To: 48098@debbugs.gnu.org, wingo@igalia.com, stefan.itampe@gmail.com Original-Received: via spool by 48098-done@debbugs.gnu.org id=D48098.161996304112441 (code D ref 48098); Sun, 02 May 2021 13:44:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 48098-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 May 2021 13:44:01 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42888 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ldCO9-0003Eb-Fp for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 02 May 2021 09:44:01 -0400 Original-Received: from fanzine.igalia.com ([178.60.130.6]:32845) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ldCO6-0003EV-UB for 48098-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 02 May 2021 09:44:00 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=igalia.com; s=20170329; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:Cc:To:From; bh=JgqX+5hzMuygrw0y+PS55C8m1HlRF+362Rjir+EF8o4=; b=d9YstX6EUGS27qWD6JZ/XwtnfhyPbvYVjUcMy9JXUbJHsyLJQaEEL0Co/I+0w4WYH+ApfM6spFUjaLIyIAcYGoVQpIpz1yJJrGCxop1IujZQwoe7eHnXYZTdXBqdVlM7MY26bL8TLyNsdPW1jR36IFZJY4P+N76M1aqXh2NS2hvEfPsZHU2tNrM0jqaHmdx7rS8Yqvm2xNHxmvJOAr+ElQfa4QrBhLD0AN8BgXhVjnEClDsUByXuXj5GOqgQ+0RboA0izzq08p88QvQ1tvlCzDu8ih5AmaLBPkc8cCMFwjJbfVIUJA69kiCPEOz4YPdNrxstBI1pVBZf2wZauCwsIw==; Original-Received: from 82-65-63-215.subs.proxad.net ([82.65.63.215] helo=sparrow) by fanzine.igalia.com with esmtpsa (Cipher TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim) id 1ldCO0-0000Ut-1w; Sun, 02 May 2021 15:43:52 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Stefan Israelsson Tampe's message of "Thu, 29 Apr 2021 12:48:55 +0200") X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-guile@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GUILE, GNU's Ubiquitous Extension Language" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-guile" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.lisp.guile.bugs:10029 Archived-At: Thanks for the report; fixed! On Thu 29 Apr 2021 12:48, Stefan Israelsson Tampe writes: > Here is an interesting test case that shows that fi we define > (define-syntax-rule (letec-m f) (let/ec c (f c))) > (define (letec-f f) (let/ec c (f c))) > > we can get two different behaviors with letec-m compiles wrongly. Obviously a bug! > > This is important in casy you would like to make a loop macro effectively with a continue directive.