From: Andrew Tropin <andrew@trop.in>
To: Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com>, Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be>
Cc: "guile-devel@gnu.org" <guile-devel@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] Eval sets incorrect runtime metainformation
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:27:10 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <878qyp6vv5.fsf@trop.in> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87frsz7krr.fsf@pobox.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2483 bytes --]
On 2024-06-26 18:04, Andy Wingo wrote:
> On Wed 26 Jun 2024 11:36, Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be> writes:
>
>> IIRC, the question wasn’t about debugging in general, it was about
>> source locations in particular. Surely program-sources (or, in this
>> case, procedure-source maybe?) (why are the procedures in this family
>> even named program-whatever, this prevents doing the same for
>> interpreted code later) could be adjusted to also work for ‘eval’. For
>> example, ‘eval’ could set the ‘source’ (*) procedure property when a
>> closure is made.
>
> I think it's really valuable to imagine how things should be but if you
> are going to argue they should be different, you should first try to
> understand how they are.
>
> `program-sources` is a mapping from bytecode offsets to source
> locations. For compiled procedures we can make this mapping because
> each bytecode position has a single source. For interpreted procedures,
> what you end up getting is the bytecode-to-source mapping *for eval*,
> not for the code being interpreted.
>
> Is it a great thing that there is a debugging (I use the term on purpose
> to mean all kinds of run-time reflection etc) difference between eval
> and compile? No, of course not. I would rather there not be a
> difference and not have to document something that is at best
> extraneous. There are differing pressures on eval: for bootstrap times
> (and macro expansion time) you want it to have the least amount of
> overhead possible, whereas for debugging you want to attach meta-data
> that isn't strictly needed at run-time. Attaching that meta-data has
> memory and time overheads.
Does it mean, we could want another eval implementation, which is a bit
havier, but will preserve additional meta-data?
not-that-primitive-and-a-bit-fancier-eval :)
>
> If we are looking to get the source location *just of the interpreted
> closure* -- that is possible; see eval.scm:581, there you would attach
> some other properties. You would have to define a different debugging
> interface that looks for source location information in a way different
> from program-sources. For me it's not worth it but I encourage you to
> experiment with (ice-9 eval); it's just another Scheme program. (You
> would need to take a different approach to memoization, in order to pass
> through source location information.)
>
> Andy
--
Best regards,
Andrew Tropin
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-28 13:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-25 15:07 [BUG] Eval sets incorrect runtime metainformation Andrew Tropin
2024-06-26 9:24 ` Andy Wingo
2024-06-26 9:36 ` Maxime Devos
2024-06-26 11:41 ` Andrew Tropin
2024-06-26 22:06 ` Philip McGrath
2024-06-28 13:20 ` Andrew Tropin
2024-06-29 19:55 ` Philip McGrath
2024-06-29 23:05 ` Maxime Devos
2024-06-30 22:27 ` Philip McGrath
2024-07-01 9:06 ` Maxime Devos
2024-07-06 16:42 ` Rob Browning
2024-07-06 18:56 ` Matt Wette
2024-06-26 16:04 ` Andy Wingo
2024-06-28 13:27 ` Andrew Tropin [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=878qyp6vv5.fsf@trop.in \
--to=andrew@trop.in \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=maximedevos@telenet.be \
--cc=wingo@pobox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).