bug#48098: closed (let/ec compilation bug)

[GNU bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Sun, 02 May 2021 15:43:41 +0200
with message-id <87r1ipjlo2.fsf@igalia.com>
and subject line Re: bug#48098: let/ec compilation bug
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #48098,
regarding let/ec compilation bug
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs@gnu.org.)


-- 
48098: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=48098
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs@gnu.org with problems

--- Begin Message --- Subject: let/ec compilation bug Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 12:48:55 +0200

Here is an interesting test case that shows that fi we define

(define-syntax-rule (letec-m f) (let/ec c (f c)))

(define                    (letec-f f) (let/ec c (f c)))

we can get two different behaviors with letec-m compiles wrongly. Obviously a bug!

This is important in casy you would like to make a loop macro effectively with a continue directive.

a.scm
Description: Text Data

--- End Message ---

> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: bug#48098: let/ec compilation bug
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Sun, 02 May 2021 15:43:41 +0200
>
>
>
>
> User-agent: 
>
> Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux)
>
>
>
>
> Thanks for the report; fixed!
>
> On Thu 29 Apr 2021 12:48, Stefan Israelsson Tampe <stefan.itampe@gmail.com> 
> writes:
>
> > Here is an interesting test case that shows that fi we define
> > (define-syntax-rule (letec-m f) (let/ec c (f c)))
> > (define                    (letec-f f) (let/ec c (f c)))
> >
> > we can get two different behaviors with letec-m compiles wrongly. Obviously a 
> > bug!
> >
> > This is important in casy you would like to make a loop macro effectively 
> > with a continue directive.
>
>
> --- End Message ---