Opened 8 years ago

Closed 6 years ago

#1083 closed defect (invalid)

cannot import procedure from one egg during macro expansion in another egg.

Reported by: Alan Post Owned by:
Priority: not urgent at all Milestone: someday
Component: compiler Version: 4.8.x
Keywords: Cc: alanpost@…
Estimated difficulty:

Description

I have two eggs, m0 and m1.

m0 defines a single procedure, f0.

m1 contains an ir-macro make-f1, which defines the procedure f1. It calls m0#f0 during macro expansion.

I get the following error during macro expansion, claiming f1 is undefined:

Error: during expansion of (make-f1 ...) - unbound variable: f0

I believe f0 is bound, and that this expansion should succeed. See attached files.

my csc version:

--(>:)-- csc -V
(c) 2008-2013, The Chicken Team
(c) 2000-2007, Felix L. Winkelmann
Version 4.8.0.5 (stability/4.8.0) (rev f60b2b6)
openbsd-unix-gnu-x86 [ manyargs dload ptables ]
compiled 2013-12-10 on celia.c0redump.org (OpenBSD)

Attachments (4)

m0.scm (83 bytes) - added by Alan Post 8 years ago.
m0.scm
m1.scm (357 bytes) - added by Alan Post 8 years ago.
m1.scm
doit (456 bytes) - added by Alan Post 8 years ago.
doit
main.scm (74 bytes) - added by Alan Post 8 years ago.
main.scm

Download all attachments as: .zip

Change History (8)

Changed 8 years ago by Alan Post

Attachment: m0.scm added

m0.scm

Changed 8 years ago by Alan Post

Attachment: m1.scm added

m1.scm

Changed 8 years ago by Alan Post

Attachment: doit added

doit

Changed 8 years ago by Alan Post

Attachment: main.scm added

main.scm

comment:1 Changed 8 years ago by Alan Post

Priority: majornot urgent at all

evhan, on IRC, found the appropriate invocation:

(begin-for-syntax

(require-library m0))

(import-for-syntax m0)

Is this still a bug? Since there is a workaround, I'm dropping the priority.

comment:2 Changed 8 years ago by Alan Post

Cc: alanpost@… added

comment:3 Changed 8 years ago by evhan

I think the important difference in the working paste is actually just having (import scheme) before the begin-for-syntax form. As long as that's true, any other permutation of the imports works:

(import-for-syntax scheme)
(import-for-syntax chicken)
(import scheme)
(begin-for-syntax (use m0))
(import chicken)
;; ... whatever else ...

This is because the scheme namespace is the one that provides begin-for-syntax, so without it the begin-for-syntax isn't expanded and m0 isn't loaded in m1 at expansion time (making f0 a run-of-the-mill unbound variable). I'd call this a gotcha rather than a bug, though maybe a warning for forms that are probably meant to be syntax like this (such as the {import,require,use}[-for-syntax] family) would be helpful?

comment:4 Changed 6 years ago by evhan

Resolution: invalid
Status: newclosed

Closing as invalid after looking into this again. The current behaviour is as expected, just a bit obscured by the macrology.

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.