Re: test-equal: actual returned value is #f when tested expression raises execption

["Jérémy Korwin-Zmijowski" <jeremy@korwin-zmijowski.fr>]

Hi Divoplade,

Thank you for your explanation. I might not have put enough emphase on my issue.

When you said:

"However,
since now there's a char-sets.scm, it can use the module and find the
function, and everything works correctly."

My concern here is that I did not defined the procedure in the module. It's empty.

Jérémy

Le 20 février 2021 12:26:46 GMT+01:00, divoplade <d@divoplade.fr> a écrit :
>Hello,
>
>This is what I understand from guile. I am no expert, so maybe it is
>not 100% accurate!
>
>Le samedi 20 février 2021 à 12:03 +0100, Jérémy Korwin-Zmijowski a
>écrit :
>> 
>> Running `guile -L . char-sets-test.scm` in the file location will
>> produce the following output :
>> 
>>    $ guile -L . char-sets-test.scm 
>>    ;;; note: auto-compilation is enabled, set GUILE_AUTO_COMPILE=0
>>    ;;;       or pass the --no-auto-compile argument to disable.
>>    ;;; compiling /tmp/char-sets-test.scm
>>    ;;; WARNING: compilation of /tmp/char-sets-test.scm failed:
>>    ;;; no code for module (char-sets)
>
>From now on, char-sets-test.scm has been compiled, but guile did not
>find password-valid?, so it assumed that this function will be
>available at run time when needed. Maybe some crazy macro expansion,
>who knows?
>> 
>> And now, I rerun the tests :
>> 
>> $ guile -L . char-sets-test.scm 
>> ;;; note: auto-compilation is enabled, set GUILE_AUTO_COMPILE=0
>> ;;;       or pass the --no-auto-compile argument to disable.
>> ;;; compiling /tmp/char-sets-test.scm
>> ;;; compiling ./char-sets.scm
>> ;;; compiled /home/jeko/.cache/guile/ccache/3.0-LE-8-4.4/tmp/char-
>> sets.scm.go
>> ;;; char-sets-test.scm:10:2: warning: possibly unbound variable
>> `password-valid?'
>> ;;; compiled /home/jeko/.cache/guile/ccache/3.0-LE-8-4.4/tmp/char-
>> sets-
>> test.scm.go
>> %%%% Starting test harness-char-sets  (Writing full log to "harness-
>> char-sets.log")
>> # of expected passes      1
>
>Guile did not re-compile the test, because the code did not change, but
>remembered from last time that password-valid? was potentially missing,
>so it issues the warning again when loading the bytecode. However,
>since now there's a char-sets.scm, it can use the module and find the
>function, and everything works correctly.
>
>Everything works because guile does not inline code from a module to
>another. So the warning is just a warning. You don't need to worry.
>

-- 
Envoyé de mon appareil Android avec Courriel K-9 Mail. Veuillez excuser ma brièveté.