On 2020/02/02 15:28:44, dak wrote: > On 2020/02/02 14:01:33, hanwenn wrote: > > https://codereview.appspot.com/553480044/diff/557280043/scm/lily.scm > > File scm/lily.scm (right): > > > > > https://codereview.appspot.com/553480044/diff/557280043/scm/lily.scm#newcode111 > > scm/lily.scm:111: "This defines a variable @var{name} with the starting value > > On 2020/02/01 21:37:50, dak wrote: > > > An interesting DOC string method... define-syntax doesn't have anything > like > > > that? > > > > > > no, doesn't look like it. > > > > I added all the GUILE repos I could find to cs.bazel.build, none of the > > define-syntax uses seem to have doc strings. See > > > > https://cs.bazel.build/search?q=define-syntax%20f%3ascm%20&num=450 > > > > > https://codereview.appspot.com/553480044/diff/557280043/scm/lily.scm#newcode123 > > scm/lily.scm:123: (define-syntax define-session > > On 2020/02/01 21:37:50, dak wrote: > > > The problem with define-syntax is that in Guile-1.8, it doesn't work > properly > > > because of some symbol changing behavior when defined, a bug that will not > get > > > fixed any more. I wish I'd remember what it was. It was something short > like > > > \once or \temporary or so. One could use it in the LilyPond core, but it > > failed > > > in user documents. Ah right: pretty sure it was \void (namely the symbol > > 'void > > > being bound to something). > > > > > > That makes it hard for people to get acquainted with it and maintain it in > > > consequence. So let's see whether we manage to muddle through in a > different > > > manner. Do you have a useful test case? Should I just draw out the > > > define-session thing and try to convince Guile-2.0 with the right > incantations > > > to byte compile it? I assume this is the same in Guile-2.2 (for which I > have > > an > > > Ubuntu package I don't need to compile)? > > > > > > Would this give us a chance to get somewhere? > > > > Please see Taylan's reply to the guile-devel list, which gives a succinct > > explanation of why inner functions in macros can never work in the Guile 2.x > > compiler. So we either forego compilation (at a 1.5 sec startup cost) or we > > rewrite the macros to stop using inner functions. > > That's what I am trying right now, but you cannot quote outer functions as a > value either (the problem is the value, not the innerness) so you need to do it > by name and I would like not to have to export it, so I try with (@@ guile-user > define-session-internal) but haven't found the right incantation yet. Still > fiddling. If it cannot be avoided, it will end up as an exported > define-session-internal .
I don't get it. define-session is not a public macro either. What is wrong with the code I propose in this change? > > What is the problem precisely with void ? I assume that is not about > > define-session but for define-music-function, which looks like it has a very > > complex macro expansion. > > > > Can you provide a repro scenario? > But basically the symptom was just that using define-syntax in a typical manner > from inside of a LilyPond document crashed with some error completely unrelated > to the actual input. would be good to have an actual patch along with the failing .ly to examine more closely. https://codereview.appspot.com/553480044/
