Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Return the result of EXP from (assert EXP)

[Peter Bex]

On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 08:58:39PM +0100, Peter Bex wrote:
> Now, knowing this, I can explain the reason there's a difference after
> you changed the assert macro (which shouldn't be even considering the
> broken test):
> 
> In the original situation, the preceding "pair?" predicate gets asserted
> directly on "p", thereby triggering the types.db rule for "pair?".
> Because it is a predicate, if the check passes, the variable is
> immediately assumed to be of that type (ie, pair, which is).

Sorry, this should read "list?", not "pair?".  It gets asserted to
be a list, which may be either a pair or null, so the null? check
won't know anymore that it should give a warning.

I had this originally, then I thought "hey, that can't be true" and
changed it to read "pair?", which isn't correct either and I really
looked at the tests and *then* I found the bug I mentioned, but
didn't revert back the text.  Sorry for the rambling.  I hope you
can still follow the logic :)

Cheers,
Peter
-- 
http://www.more-magic.net