bug-guix
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#62287: Ungexp inside vector problem


From: Andrew Tropin
Subject: bug#62287: Ungexp inside vector problem
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2023 06:57:12 +0400

On 2023-03-20 11:45, Josselin Poiret wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
>
> Andrew Tropin <andrew@trop.in> writes:
>
>> I would expect two last expressions return the same result, but the
>> former one doesn't do ungexp:
>>
>> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
>> (define a '(3 4))
>>
>> (define b `#(1 2 ,a))
>>
>> (eval-with-store
>>  #~(list '(1 2 #$a))) ;; => ((1 2 (3 4)))
>>
>> (eval-with-store
>>  #~(list #(1 2 #$a))) ;; => (#(1 2 (ungexp a)))
>>
>> (eval-with-store
>>  #~(list #$b)) ;; => (#(1 2 4))
>> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>>
>> Am I doing/expecting something wrong or there is a bug here?
>
> It's more related to how the guile reader works, and this is such a
> corner case that I don't know whether we should fix.  Basically,
> anything starting with # is a reader extension, and the next character
> identifies which extension it is.  #( is the reader extension for
> vectors, #~ for gexp and #$ for ungexp.
>
> To simplify, whenever you use #~, guile will insert (gexp ...) instead,
> which is a hygienic macro (not just a procedure!), that will look for
> ungexps inside the expression.  That traversal is only made on cons
> cells though, so it doesn't try to go through any piece of syntax that
> is not a cons cell!  Since #( doesn't expand to a (vector ...)
> cons-cell, the subexpression gets ignored for traversal.
>
> This is in contrast to another reader extension, #' (for syntax), which
> does expand to (syntax ...), and is thus further traversed!
>
> You can find how both of these reader extensions operate in
> <libguile/read.c>.
>
> I guess the immediate fix is to use (vector ...) rather than #(...).  We
> could also add code to the gexp traversal to also traverse vectors, but
> I am not even sure if they go through the gexp->sexp dance unharmed, and
> we also should in principle do that for everything that can get into a
> gexp, not just vectors (eg. bytevectors).
>

Thank you very much for extensive explanation!  I have a few tasks
related to the guile reader extensions, so when I get my hands dirty
with it, I'll probably share my new thoughts and opinions on this topic.

-- 
Best regards,
Andrew Tropin

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]