bug#42574: closed (Probable (system vm trace) bug)

[GNU bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Fri, 21 May 2021 20:38:33 +0200
with message-id <FDEDE69F-02D0-4C74-B389-A8C8D7822D5C@sarc.name>
and subject line Re: bug#42574: Probable (system vm trace) bug
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #42574,
regarding Probable (system vm trace) bug
to be marked as done.

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


-- 
42574: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=42574
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs@gnu.org with problems

--- Begin Message --- Subject: Probable (system vm trace) bug Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 15:23:19 +0545

Esteemed Maintainers,

I am quite positive that what I am experiencing is not quite a bug but just some mis-step on my part. But I have been encouraged to report this as a possible bug. Thus, here it is.

Context:

Guile version: 3.0.2 (installed using guix)

Loaded Files: simply.scm (https://github.com/hosoe-masaki/SimplyScheme/blob/master/simply.scm)

Reverse function (referred to in the report, assumes 'simply.scm' has been loaded):

(define (reverse wd) (if (equal? wd "") "" (word (reverse (bf wd)) (first wd))))

;; (reverse 'asdf) -> 'fdsa

This started with my first wanting to run a (trace) of a recursive procedure as seen in Chapter 13 of the book 'Simply Scheme' (https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~bh/ssch13/convince-recur.html). I looked for a waay to (trace) in guile, but couldn't find anything except ,trace, which was giving a trace of everything that the function (reverse) called from inside of it, thus making the trace 'polluted'.

I then looked around and found that a (trace) function, much like the one being demonstrated in the book used to exist once in guile: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/docs/docs-1.8/guile-ref/Tracing.html and then found that for guile3 there was something that looked similarly promising: the (trace-calls-to-procedure) function (https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/docs/master/guile.html/Tracing-Traps.html). However,

> (trace-calls-to-procedure reverse)

> (reverse 'asdf)

fdsa

produced no trace. This led me to ask around IRC for some guidance regarding it. Someone from #emacs suggested I try doing this: http://ix.io/2suZ

When I attempted to do the same thing, however, I encountered the following error, at the sight of which, it was recommended that I file a (possible) bug report: https://termbin.com/6nm5

The following `script` typescript might also be of interest to the maintainers (to be replayed using `scriptreplay`):

typescript - https://termbin.com/sx5o

timing file - https://termbin.com/73ei

(This one records the (call-with-trace) call with both #:call? #f and without the specification).

I must confess, I don't understand a whole lot of this. All I would like to say is that I have a feeling (trace-calls-to-procedure procedure) should have worked like (trace) as shown in chapter 13 section 'trace' in the book (https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~bh/ssch13/convince-recur.html); it just seems 'right' by the name of it. I was expecting the trace from (trace-call-to-procedure reverse) (reverse 'asdf) to be basically like ,trace (reverse 'asdf) but without the traces of all other procedures.

Please do let me know if I have left out any important details. And please do let me know if I am doing something wrong here. I am almost quite certain this is just a minor error on my part, rather than a bug (and I'd really like to be able to trace those procedures).

--- End Message ---

> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: bug#42574: Probable (system vm trace) bug
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Fri, 21 May 2021 20:38:33 +0200
>
>
>
>
> This has been fixed in f9f55b9ce74898d1b0a77dcc9b4aa260e5cd208d. Apologies for 
> not noticing the earlier patch... there were a couple later duplicates.
>
> Thanks!
>
> --- End Message ---