Re: [Chicken-hackers] Half a bug report

[Jörg F . Wittenberger]

On Jun 5 2012, Christian Kellermann wrote:

> * Jörg F. Wittenberger <address@hidden> [120605 14:59]:
> > A chicken version from trunk as of 2012-02-10 did catch
> > the following error with ease.  My next update per 2012-05-12
> > did no longer.
>
> So you have gotten a compiler error?
>
> With master I get a runtime error only using the following code:

That's been my point: as soon as I remove enough of the actual
code to pin down the problem, everything is fine.

To be clear my timeline step wise:
1. new (May) compiler on bad complex source compiled without
  warning into bad code.  (Several compiler rebuilds
  and different machines.)
  [[Me so far no idea why.]]
2. Reverting to old (Feb) version gave immediately the warning
  about wrong parameter; not completing the compile.
3. Fixed the call both compilers produce good code.
  [[issue at hand solved now prepare the report]]
4. Try to boil the bad code into foo/bar -> hardly compiles
  until all "unrelated" stuff is removed.  Eventually all
  appears to be more related than hoped for.  Once short like
  that May compiler catch the error too.

> $ cat t.scm
> (receive (a b c) (values 1 2 3 4) (print a b c))

Ah, wait, that's wrong half.  I did:

(define (threeari+ x y z) (+ x y z))

((lambda (values a b c)
 (if <sometimes> (values 2 3) (values 1 2 3)))
threeari+ 'a 'b 'c)

Thus two calls with a symbol named "values" in operator
position (mentioning this because "values" might be likely
to have gotten a special handling by the compiler).
This values being bound to a well known procedure of fixed
arity.  One call is correct, one missing some parameter(s).

But don't aim chicken on the above example.  It works.
That is, it complains rightfully.