From: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
To: Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com>
Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: when and unless
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2011 23:08:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87y5upicaf.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8739cxob6z.fsf@pobox.com> (Andy Wingo's message of "Tue, 06 Dec 2011 18:35:16 +0100")
Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com> writes:
> which is strictly unspecified, as it is returning an unexpected number
> of values to a continuation.
>
> Guile 1.8:
>
> guile> (eqv? (values) (values))
> #f
>
> Guile 2.0:
>
> scheme@(guile-user)> (eqv? (values) (values))
> ERROR: In procedure values:
> ERROR: Throw to key `vm-error' with args `(vm-run "Zero values returned to single-valued continuation" ())'.
>
> Not a nicely printed error, but oh well.
>
> Guile 2.0 returns a canonical unspecified value in this situation. I
> would like to consider returning 0 values instead in the future, but
> figuring out how to do so without breaking the world is tricky. It's
> useful to hear about your experiences with *unspecified*.
>
>> I am working on a language where returning values in certain contexts
>> might at one point of time might lead to the values being used. So I
>> need to implement warnings to that effect in order to find out calls
>> _not_ returning *unspecified*...
>
> Have you considered using `(values)' as your way of saying, "I'm not
> returning any values"?
Testing for that is not all that much fun. It is also rather useless
since pretty much all of the call-for-effect functions of Guile return
*unspecified* rather than (values).
It is not clear to me why (values) can't just evaluate to a single
*unspecified* just like '() evaluates to null. Outside of
call-with-values, I don't see much need to treat it special.
--
David Kastrup
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-12-06 22:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-30 10:44 when and unless Andy Wingo
2011-06-30 21:46 ` Ludovic Courtès
2011-07-01 7:50 ` Andy Wingo
2011-07-01 12:47 ` Ludovic Courtès
2011-12-05 20:23 ` Andy Wingo
2011-12-06 7:48 ` Marijn
2011-12-06 8:29 ` Alex Shinn
2011-12-06 11:17 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-06 16:25 ` Andy Wingo
2011-12-06 16:42 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-06 17:35 ` Andy Wingo
2011-12-06 22:08 ` David Kastrup [this message]
2011-12-06 23:05 ` Chris K. Jester-Young
2011-12-07 9:23 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-07 15:58 ` Chris K. Jester-Young
2011-12-08 8:42 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-08 15:34 ` Chris K. Jester-Young
2011-12-08 16:10 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-08 18:10 ` Ian Price
2011-12-07 16:10 ` Chris K. Jester-Young
2011-12-06 19:05 ` Chris K. Jester-Young
2011-12-06 19:33 ` Andy Wingo
2011-12-06 14:39 ` Ludovic Courtès
2011-12-07 14:19 ` Ludovic Courtès
2011-12-07 14:27 ` David Kastrup
2012-01-07 0:16 ` Andy Wingo
2012-01-07 22:36 ` Ludovic Courtès
2012-01-20 20:19 ` Andy Wingo
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=87y5upicaf.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org \
--to=dak@gnu.org \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
--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).