Il giorno dom 6 set 2020 alle ore 17:13 <2qdxy4rzwzuui...@potatochowder.com> ha scritto:
> On 2020-09-06 at 16:03:17 +0200, > Zelphir Kaltstahl <zelphirkaltst...@posteo.de> wrote: > > > If I move a file using `mv`, a recomplation seems to be not > > required. If I copy the file instead, Guile recompiled it. Does this > > have something to do with inodes or creation date, which is > > differently handled when using `cp` instead of `mv`? > > That was my first thought. Renaming a file (using mv) doesn't change > the timestamp, and it's likely that guile tries to use a cached version > but some of the pieces don't fit right. Probably the cached version contains, hardwired, to say so, the _old_ name of the file so when the compiled version runs, the file can't be found ? Also if this is the case, the error message is... suboptimal ? Maybe, being able to process the exception that gets raised, you could extract more information about the error The interesting line is this one 1736:10 7 (with-exception-handler _ _ #:unwind? _ #:unwind-for-type _) If you can manage to somehow process such exception, it'd be nice if you would share what you find ☺
