From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] srfi-34: Replace the 'raise' core binding. Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2019 12:00:44 +0100 Message-ID: <87imn3c5gj.fsf@igalia.com> References: <20191125164555.15124-1-ludo@gnu.org> <20191125164555.15124-2-ludo@gnu.org> <877e3nt0dm.fsf@igalia.com> <87y2w26axz.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="252291"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 29 12:16:16 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iaeFy-0013UO-Ri for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 29 Nov 2019 12:16:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57262 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iaeFx-0003hA-Gd for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 29 Nov 2019 06:16:13 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:51907) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iaeEX-00039k-O9 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 29 Nov 2019 06:14:46 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iae1X-0007I9-AM for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 29 Nov 2019 06:01:21 -0500 Original-Received: from fanzine.igalia.com ([178.60.130.6]:44411) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iae1V-00065T-Gt; Fri, 29 Nov 2019 06:01:19 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=igalia.com; s=20170329; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:Cc:To:From; bh=QFcTIY81pyh2mw3Cukkb+xZAumRJcyIQ72pWtu73R4g=; b=qiY+H8PJQRWnmTzgfkHaf3VFPqZuKvVwFww2aUndTqYnHzTUJ7fRpMmWDrVm9RWuU5mOmAzRdgh3Nl0+4+8Ese4OcZQeNG96mukPgBZMzHHWs0DjB2wD2A++ckcm2p016CcgwIjCfjgZLWZJIQfm+bF63mASIQ6v3e3iAyf06FpwFstKNGCQPJHBTpwU36TIpE87wnCBCZHxQIijB8xp3+0tyPithBGlr/AzYA5NkJF5npganTXvjO+gi2COmIxPwlBOZOSf7Ie7BpEio7XbELS3JS+0Hamq9Rwyuhdlul5nnIL+ssM8f5oT9UrdTf8BXqgifByZk8G7xwny0C5lVQ==; Original-Received: from lfbn-ann-1-376-195.w86-200.abo.wanadoo.fr ([86.200.91.195] helo=milano) by fanzine.igalia.com with esmtpsa (Cipher TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim) id 1iae18-0000AM-Lo; Fri, 29 Nov 2019 12:00:54 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87y2w26axz.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Tue, 26 Nov 2019 14:09:44 +0100") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x (no timestamps) [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 178.60.130.6 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "guile-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:20173 Archived-At: On Tue 26 Nov 2019 14:09, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: > AFAICS there are two blockers: > > 1. We cannot replace & re-export at the same time. Following discussion on IRC, this is fixed now, with #:re-export-and-replace. Would be nice if #:re-export could know whether a binding is local or re-exported and DTRT but that isn't the case currently. > 2. =E2=80=98raise=E2=80=99 takes exactly one argument, whereas =E2=80= =98raise-exception=E2=80=99 takes > an additional keyword argument. I think ignoring this one is fine FWIW. > Perhaps also we should provide a mechanism similar to GCC attributes to > mark a procedure as throwing, so that the compiler can DTRT? An interesting option :) FWIW the compiler has to also know how to call the callee... Something to think about. Cheers, Andy