From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?=) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: psyntax error reporting bug Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 23:41:35 +0200 Message-ID: <87pr8k752o.fsf@gnu.org> References: <2bc5f8210910181358s79754b98uad8268fc9d267d8c@mail.gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1255902147 9652 80.91.229.12 (18 Oct 2009 21:42:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 21:42:27 +0000 (UTC) To: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 18 23:42:17 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MzdW2-0003gX-5K for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 18 Oct 2009 23:42:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40682 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MzdW1-0005IB-NB for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 18 Oct 2009 17:42:13 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MzdVz-0005I4-74 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Oct 2009 17:42:11 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MzdVu-0005H2-PT for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Oct 2009 17:42:10 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=33008 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MzdVu-0005Gz-KG for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Oct 2009 17:42:06 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:56533) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MzdVu-00025R-3H for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Oct 2009 17:42:06 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1MzdVo-0003ap-U3 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Oct 2009 23:42:00 +0200 Original-Received: from reverse-83.fdn.fr ([80.67.176.83]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 18 Oct 2009 23:42:00 +0200 Original-Received: from ludo by reverse-83.fdn.fr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 18 Oct 2009 23:42:00 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 31 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: reverse-83.fdn.fr X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 27 =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vend=E9miaire?= an 218 de la =?iso-8859-1?Q?R=E9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0xEA52ECF4 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 821D 815D 902A 7EAB 5CEE D120 7FBA 3D4F EB1F 5364 X-OS: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:AahqOv5oCQYdMq2yRwkUw3RPX1A= X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:9505 Archived-At: Hello! Julian Graham writes: > I'm no psyntax expert, but it looks like there's a minor typo in our > psyntax implementation. In psyntax.scm, at line 1325 (in > `chi-macro'), the expression: > > (syntax-violation #f "encountered raw symbol in macro output" > (source-wrap e w s mod) x) > > ...should read: > > (syntax-violation #f "encountered raw symbol in macro output" > (source-wrap e w (wrap-subst w) mod) x) > > ...since `s' is not actually in scope I actually noticed that when testing ‘-Wunbound-variable’: ice-9/psyntax-pp.scm:1089:38: warning: possibly unbound variable `s' But I didn’t take the time to investigate, so I’m glad you did. :-) > -- which, with the former code, generates an error that obscures the > actual syntax violation. I can prepare a patch if people want. Andy is the expert, but I think such a patch can’t hurt, so please do! Thanks, Ludo’.