From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Kevin Ryde Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: Using a macro with FOLD alters FOLD procedure! Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 08:16:26 +1000 Message-ID: <878y3b93np.fsf@zip.com.au> References: <56190b6c05041511382ae259d@mail.gmail.com> <1113594648.3650.8.camel@cslabpc3.evansville.edu> <56190b6c05041515205fd8b6a@mail.gmail.com> <4260FB26.4080607@ossau.uklinux.net> <87r7h8q5dl.fsf@trouble.defaultvalue.org> <426749AD.3090403@ossau.uklinux.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1114122300 9179 80.91.229.2 (21 Apr 2005 22:25:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 22:25:00 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 22 00:24:57 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DOk5R-0007F1-2j for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Fri, 22 Apr 2005 00:23:53 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DOkAE-0001xo-Gm for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 18:28:50 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DOk7t-0000oW-Aw for guile-user@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 18:26:25 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DOk7q-0000mU-Lc for guile-user@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 18:26:24 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DOk7p-0008KT-Pa for guile-user@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 18:26:21 -0400 Original-Received: from [61.8.0.85] (helo=mailout2.pacific.net.au) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DOk1G-0005Mc-NR for guile-user@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 18:19:35 -0400 Original-Received: from mailproxy2.pacific.net.au (mailproxy2.pacific.net.au [61.8.0.87]) by mailout2.pacific.net.au (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-7.1) with ESMTP id j3LMGUml005905 for ; Fri, 22 Apr 2005 08:16:30 +1000 Original-Received: from localhost (ppp2BE0.dyn.pacific.net.au [61.8.43.224]) by mailproxy2.pacific.net.au (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-7.1) with ESMTP id j3LMGT0H010052 for ; Fri, 22 Apr 2005 08:16:29 +1000 Original-Received: from gg by localhost with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1DOjyE-0000eU-00; Fri, 22 Apr 2005 08:16:26 +1000 Original-To: guile-user@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <426749AD.3090403@ossau.uklinux.net> (Neil Jerram's message of "Thu, 21 Apr 2005 07:35:25 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110003 (No Gnus v0.3) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:4401 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.user:4401 Neil Jerram writes: > > We could certainly do this, but I think I remember a thread where it was > suggested that we treat any occurrence of a macro in non-car position as > an error - which would catch the problem more generally. I suppose it depends if a macro should be a first class object to be thrown around (or do I misunderstand?). I've been gradually converting srfi-1 procs to C, which has the side effect of checking the procs are actual procedures. I suppose there must be plenty of ordinary application code passing procedures around in exactly the same way that's vulnerable to memoizing macros. (Could a memoized form check it's got the same macro as originally expanded, as a safety check? Or do I misunderstand again?) _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user