From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Nala Ginrut Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: GNU Guile 2.9.8 Released [beta] Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2020 11:16:46 +0800 Message-ID: References: <87woaa3rq4.fsf@pobox.com> <871rsb54fb.fsf@pobox.com> <87k15yqo4o.fsf@pobox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000070e672059d026c77" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="74132"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: guile-devel To: Andy Wingo Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Jan 26 04:17:13 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@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 1ivYQD-000JFA-J3 for guile-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 26 Jan 2020 04:17:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59104 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ivYQC-0005px-Ak for guile-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 25 Jan 2020 22:17:12 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46165) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ivYQ1-0005nD-Im for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Jan 2020 22:17:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ivYQ0-0005Xn-1b for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Jan 2020 22:17:01 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-yw1-xc32.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::c32]:41916) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ivYPz-0005WL-SO for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Jan 2020 22:16:59 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-yw1-xc32.google.com with SMTP id l22so3054372ywc.8 for ; Sat, 25 Jan 2020 19:16:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=k2t+XaUANHCPCgHy8BDg2Ff6HAWs/1oo9T8nlW+BJhw=; b=UXiq9WPYMg05v3lrl1UvvweQ/85GY6E3FpC/Z6FWl8C8eyVMY5ifE2CxyAcSJZT9On X7V/KMSfdGlVDupSSPT12IZ5XYvXjONNn488PBShktuwONEngqMT6vOXdsfkgRFAKazE vV9Q1jUp8wHlk1NyjfZKQnZifFxfAYWbLeU2uC4VvCAmVUeLQGN4sV9H0a/F6H/FZZY4 2NABWcKNtRhzTIkPPVMuJn13VM4twp1sWIPVAdjojYsMR9COIDADypbYZ56jLvSyebYm zsKmtC2IUVOc1csO4Z+IQP8OrqNXZvj3cd/xSwB90oFT78soxVjQsTKw/+7tAq4a5FCK 7SRw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=k2t+XaUANHCPCgHy8BDg2Ff6HAWs/1oo9T8nlW+BJhw=; b=mVPPFT4b0/A9Uk04SlvjVEVr4VGWYzTRG/mKGdbgcs34WzPGYF1OAYmjYxpX5anQR2 +il+DOfBksS1ZSbSJZ2b8/Q/yUTZiOmTTisHQtRdIVK/O9RU6gbcHcdJzVF3KMQiDSkz r7DofEr63fSiN3MwFUdgN5oJUz2o9qc0W6byAeFchCgIMPmqvKBoC1ecZlWec565Fyl9 dFTo6FTsvyCNNI2IFZmoLS+1C0JGql0m5tLhka4I4vZxHofOEMIXdJ3CoAj/Go8gfRwy amvXT+jJymy0GVMyymzWTqUlnHK+lU95/xpUCSFBE3oryq3tIMj1QK1QrSLseK2KXCm8 o25A== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVp0IhYhZr+wGUdefVwqW6WrROCmIRZaEjscTUQCsZB2IHAys9L AcgPoIEEmm8NnMQxSZrJg0sle0Sghh5N5ybFu0M= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzzMwqq3c7L8W09CI5Ahpoz/3p+KWHmJS6h2ocIMsMWEFXNMnauMBhdLqrVuLS1RvkzqsZ0+0k+ER3tp3PXflo= X-Received: by 2002:a81:bb41:: with SMTP id a1mr7549255ywl.253.1580008618385; Sat, 25 Jan 2020 19:16:58 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4864:20::c32 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "guile-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.lisp.guile.devel:20337 Archived-At: --00000000000070e672059d026c77 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable @Andy Wingo It's my mistake to call an incompatible constructor after I updated the interfaces. I think Guile-3 made more strict checking because this mistake wasn't caught before 2.9. Now folks may use docker to try Artanis on Guile-3 docker pull registry.gitlab.com/nalaginrut/artanis:latest Best regards. On Sun, Jan 19, 2020 at 3:43 AM Nala Ginrut wrote: > Just a report, the same compiling error existing in Guile-3.0.0. > > Best regards. > > > On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 4:49 PM Nala Ginrut wrote: > >> Hi Wingo! >> Here're update: >> 1. 2.9.9 didn't fix this issue >> >> 2. I imported r6rs record-type in (artanis utils), and this module was >> imported in almost every artanis modules. >> I do use r6rs specific record API to introspect the internal things for >> debugging in Artanis. >> And I imported r6rs define-record-type in server-context.scm >> I guess there're some name conflicting. >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 6:33 PM Andy Wingo wrote: >> >>> On Wed 08 Jan 2020 15:22, Nala Ginrut writes: >>> >>> > In unknown file: >>> > 4 (primitive-load-path "artanis/server/server-context" #<= =E2=80=A6>) >>> > In ice-9/eval.scm: >>> > 626:19 3 (_ #) >>> > 155:9 2 (_ #) >>> > In ice-9/boot-9.scm: >>> > 1153:19 1 (_ _ _ _ _ _ _) >>> > 1655:16 0 (raise-exception _ #:continuable? _) >>> > >>> > ice-9/boot-9.scm:1655:16: In procedure raise-exception: >>> > Wrong number of arguments to #>> ice-9/boot-9.scm:1153:19 (a b c d e f)> >>> > >>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------= --------------------------------------------- >>> > >>> > Any hint that I can figure out whait's incompatible? >>> >>> Gosh we need to improve this info. Anyway the procedure at >>> boot-9.scm:1153:19 is a record constructor, for a record with 6 fields. >>> Apparently somewhere in (artanis server server-context) is calling it >>> with the wrong number of arguments. What do you use for records? Do >>> you have your own abstraction or do you use R6RS records or something? >>> Perhaps something in artanis relied on the way that R6RS records used t= o >>> implement single inheritance, as a chain of objects instead of a flat >>> record. Or perhaps the adaptations to R6RS records in Guile introduced >>> a bug. I am interested to know the answer :) >>> >>> Andy >>> >> --00000000000070e672059d026c77 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
@Andy Wingo
It's m= y mistake to call an incompatible constructor after I updated the interface= s. I think Guile-3 made more strict checking because this mistake wasn'= t caught before 2.9.

Now folks may use docker to t= ry Artanis on Guile-3


Best regards.


On Sun, Jan 19, 2020 at 3:43 AM Nala Ginrut <nalaginrut@gmail.com> wrote:
=
Just a report, the same compiling error existing in Guile-3.0.0.

Best regards.


On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at= 4:49 PM Nala Ginrut <nalaginrut@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Wingo!
Here&= #39;re update:
1. 2.9.9 didn't fix this issue

<= /div>
2. I imported r6rs record-type in (artanis utils), and this modul= e was imported in almost every artanis modules.
I do use r6rs spe= cific record API to introspect the internal things for debugging in Artanis= .
And I imported r6rs define-record-type in server-context.sc= m
I guess there're some name conflicting.



On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 6:33 PM Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com> wrote:
=
On Wed 08 Jan 2020 = 15:22, Nala Ginrut <nalaginrut@gmail.com> writes:

> In unknown file:
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 4 (primitive-load-path "= artanis/server/server-context" #<=E2=80=A6>)
> In ice-9/eval.scm:
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 626:19=C2=A0 3 (_ #<directory (artanis server server-c= ontext) 5624d6b3=E2=80=A6>)
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0155:9=C2=A0 2 (_ #<directory (artanis server ser= ver-context) 5624d6b3=E2=80=A6>)
> In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
>=C2=A0 =C2=A01153:19=C2=A0 1 (_ _ _ _ _ _ _)
>=C2=A0 =C2=A01655:16=C2=A0 0 (raise-exception _ #:continuable? _)
>
> ice-9/boot-9.scm:1655:16: In procedure raise-exception:
> Wrong number of arguments to #<procedure 5624d66ee4a0 at ice-9/boot= -9.scm:1153:19 (a b c d e f)>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------= ----------------------------------------------
>
> Any hint that I can figure out whait's incompatible?

Gosh we need to improve this info.=C2=A0 Anyway the procedure at
boot-9.scm:1153:19 is a record constructor, for a record with 6 fields.
Apparently somewhere in (artanis server server-context) is calling it
with the wrong number of arguments.=C2=A0 What do you use for records?=C2= =A0 Do
you have your own abstraction or do you use R6RS records or something?
Perhaps something in artanis relied on the way that R6RS records used to implement single inheritance, as a chain of objects instead of a flat
record.=C2=A0 Or perhaps the adaptations to R6RS records in Guile introduce= d
a bug.=C2=A0 I am interested to know the answer :)

Andy
--00000000000070e672059d026c77--