"Andy Wingo" wrote: >On Thu 18 Nov 2010 22:25, Marco Maggi <marco.maggi-i...@poste.it> writes: > >> With Guile's master branch checkout >> 8d10ccae79ff46f0ebea92ba36acfaebafba8d86 on an >> i686-pc-linux-gnu I get the following error: > > Glad you found your problem in other mails.
I have not. I was wrong regarding bindings not being re-exported (I forgot what my local scripting infrastructure did); but I still get the "unbound variable" error from Guile. The only thing I can guess (after trying to comment/uncomment random forms) is that it is a problem with the expander possibly in its interaction with compiled code, because all the other R6RS implementations work fine. Also I have found this: when I run the test with "--autocompile" (starting with a clean cache) I get the error: GUILE_LOAD_PATH=. guile -l guile-r6rs-setup.scm --autocompile -s ./tests/test-annotated-types.sps ;;; note: autocompilation is enabled, set GUILE_AUTO_COMPILE=0 ;;; or pass the --no-autocompile argument to disable. ;;; compiling guile-r6rs-setup.scm [...] ;;; WARNING: compilation of ./tests/test-annotated-types.sps failed: ;;; key vm-error, throw_args (vm-run "VM: Unbound variable: ~s" (#<variable 851b5e8 value: #<undefined>>)) guile: uncaught throw to vm-error: (vm-run "VM: Unbound variable: ~s" (#<variable 851b5e8 value: #<undefined>>)) make: *** [gtest] Error 1 but when running with "--no-autocompile" (with a clean cache) I get: GUILE_LOAD_PATH=. guile -l guile-r6rs-setup.scm --no-autocompile -s ./tests/test-annotated-types.sps Backtrace: In ice-9/boot-9.scm: 62: 19 [call-with-prompt prompt0 ...] In ice-9/eval.scm: 389: 18 [eval # #] In ice-9/boot-9.scm: 1858: 17 [save-module-excursion #<procedure 825ceb8 at ice-9/boot-9.scm:1871:3 ()>] 1149: 16 [load "./tests/test-annotated-types.sps" #f] 1051: 15 [%start-stack load-stack ...] 1056: 14 [#<procedure 825ce28 ()>] In unknown file: ?: 13 [primitive-load "./tests/test-annotated-types.sps"] In ice-9/eval.scm: 458: 12 [#<procedure 8133ba0 at ice-9/eval.scm:451:4 (exp)> (let () # #t)] In ice-9/psyntax.scm: 1223: 11 [chi-top (let () (define-type-annotation + (# fx+) ...) ...) () ...] 2074: 10 [chi-let (let () (define-type-annotation + (# fx+) ...) ...) () ...] 1421: 9 [parse ((# . #) (# . #)) () () ...] 1072: 8 [syntax-type (define-type-annotation + # # ...) (#) (# #) ...] 1368: 7 [chi-macro #<procedure 843de70 at ice-9/eval.scm:377:13 (a)> # # ...] In ice-9/eval.scm: 389: 6 [eval # #] 389: 5 [eval # #] 349: 4 [eval #<memoized (assert (identifier? <3>))> (# # # # . #)] 356: 3 [eval #<memoized assert> (# # # # . #)] In unknown file: ?: 2 [memoize-variable-access! #<memoized assert> #<directory # 8458828>] In ice-9/boot-9.scm: 115: 1 [#<procedure 80a82f8 at ice-9/boot-9.scm:109:6 (thrown-k . args)> unbound-variable ...] In unknown file: ?: 0 [catch-closure unbound-variable #f "Unbound variable: ~S" (assert) #f] ERROR: Unbound variable: assert make: *** [gtest] Error 1 I do use ASSERT in the code, but I do no strange things with its binding. Unfortunately I have no time to dive in the internals of Scheme implementations. -- Marco Maggi
