From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Marko Rauhamaa Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: Guile 2.0 interpretation vs compilation Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 09:33:55 +0300 Message-ID: <87wq8d671o.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> References: <87d2a693st.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <87d2a5esk0.fsf@netris.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1412577271 18294 80.91.229.3 (6 Oct 2014 06:34:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 06:34:31 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-user@gnu.org To: Mark H Weaver Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 06 08:34:24 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-user@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Xb1sF-00068O-KB for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Mon, 06 Oct 2014 08:34:23 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50133 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xb1sF-00025y-8R for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Mon, 06 Oct 2014 02:34:23 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47245) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xb1rx-0001y9-B5 for guile-user@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Oct 2014 02:34:10 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xb1rs-0002Xm-AI for guile-user@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Oct 2014 02:34:05 -0400 Original-Received: from pacujo.net ([83.150.83.132]:57036) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xb1rs-0002XQ-3r for guile-user@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Oct 2014 02:34:00 -0400 Original-Received: from elektro.pacujo.net (192.168.1.200) by elektro.pacujo.net; Mon, 6 Oct 2014 09:33:55 +0300 Original-Received: by elektro.pacujo.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 06 Oct 2014 09:33:55 +0300 In-Reply-To: <87d2a5esk0.fsf@netris.org> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Mon, 06 Oct 2014 00:22:07 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 83.150.83.132 X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:11567 Archived-At: Mark H Weaver : > This is expected but not ideal. Our primitive evaluator does not > preserve non-toplevel variable names, and therefore the associated > procedure names are lost. Maybe we can fix this in Guile 2.2. I noticed the issue because I have software that depends on the procedure-name of inner functions. I can live with this guile-2.0 quirk if it is considered a guile defect. However, if the semantics of procedure-name of inner functions is unspecified, I'll have to look at refactoring my code. Marko