[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#40371: [R7RS] Guile does not accept library name parts that are non-

From: lloda
Subject: bug#40371: [R7RS] Guile does not accept library name parts that are non-negative exact integers
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2020 22:26:35 +0200

(import (srfi 9)) doesn't work, but (import (srfi :9)) does.

On 2 Apr 2020, at 21:47, Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen <address@hidden> wrote:

Am Do., 2. Apr. 2020 um 21:05 Uhr schrieb Andy Wingo <address@hidden>:
In the concrete case of the SRFI modules, importing e.g. (srfi 9) works
AFAIU.  Does this not work for you?

I use Guile 3.9.1.

I can do (import (srfi srfi-9)), but I can't do (import (srfi 9)).

That latter yields the error:

source _expression_ failed to match any pattern in form (srfi 9).

I think that allowing numbers as module name components, beyond the SRFI
modules, is not currently a good idea for Guile.  I had a look at it and
it's a bit too intrusive.

If numbers are not allowed, Guile will be severely crippled with respect to R7RS code. Most SRFIs are distributed under the name `(srfi NNN)' so many R7RS programs intended to be portable will try to import libraries of the form, say `(srfi 9)' and Guile would complain.

`cond-expand' is not helpful here in general as an R7RS top-level program has to start with an import and cannot start with some `(cond-expand (guile ...))'. (Besides, `cond-expand' has its own problems: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-guile/2020-03/msg00097.html).

As a quick-and-dirty workaround, I would suggest that the Guiles (syntax-case?) parser of library names accepts numbers as module name components but treats them internally as symbols (say, by prefixing them with a colon) so that the main module code doesn't have to be touched. The locator for library code in the file system will then have to look for a filenname with a colon and without.




On Wed 01 Apr 2020 12:47, Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen <address@hidden> writes:

> An R7RS library name consists of parts, where each part is either a symbol or
> a non-negative exact integer. Guile doesn't support the latter ones.
> This is unfortunate as the implementation of a SRFI NNN is usually delivered
> in form of a library named (srfi NNN).
> When this is corrected, for interoperability, it would be great if Guile offers
> the included SRFIs not only under the name (srfi srfi-NNN) but also under
> (srfi NNN).
> Thanks,
> Marc

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]