Mark H Weaver writes:
> The 'letrec' form above is indeed invalid. As the R5RS states:
>
> One restriction on 'letrec' is very important: it must be possible
> to evaluate each without assigning or referring to the value
> of any . If this restriction is violated, then it is an
Mark H Weaver writes:
> It seems misguided to try to use Scheme code to temporarily switch the
> current language to Scheme. Doesn't this approach presuppose that
> Scheme is already the current language?
Or one that's "sufficiently similar".
I think in part I was originally confused because I
Hi Linas,
Linas Vepstas writes:
> However -- if one does call `scm_error` fairly rapidly, from multiple
> threads, one will eventually hit a race condition and get a crash.
If you could produce a small, self-contained example demonstrating this,
it would enable us to investigate further.
Hi Rob,
Rob Browning writes:
> This doesn't work with 2.2.4:
>
> (eval-when (expand load eval)
> (let ((ignored #t))
> (define-module (bar)
> #:use-module (has-foo))
> (format #t "foo: ~s\n" (foo
>
> producing:
>
> ERROR: In procedure %resolve-variable:
> Unboun
Hi Rob,
Rob Browning writes:
> Rob Browning writes:
>
>> I narrowed down an issue I'd hit to this:
>>
>> ;; somefile.scm
>> (define-syntax foo
>> (syntax-rules ()
>> ((_ any ...) (letrec ((x y) (y 'foo)) x
>>
>> (eval-when (expand load eval) (foo 1))
>
> Wait, maybe that's j
