Here's one thing that the latest PS breaks in our code.
(ps (list 1 2 3)) => "[1,2,3];"
(ps (let ((list nil)) (setf list (list 1 2 3)))) => "var list5180 = null; list5180 = list5180(1, 2, 3);"
I think this behavior is incorrect. It is quite surprising for a lexical variable to shadow a macro definition.
Daniel
Just pushed out a patch that fixes this. The solution turned out to be a lot more involved than I originally suspected - basically the PS compiler had to be refactored to give control of macroexpansion over to special forms (the way it was previously handling macroexpansion was quite naive, but would have been suitable for a single-namespace Lisp).
The changes that have been going on in the recent while are starting to make Parenscript almost look like a "real Lisp compiler."
Vladimir
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Daniel Gackle danielgackle@gmail.com wrote:
Here's one thing that the latest PS breaks in our code.
(ps (list 1 2 3)) => "[1,2,3];"
(ps (let ((list nil)) (setf list (list 1 2 3)))) => "var list5180 = null; list5180 = list5180(1, 2, 3);"
I think this behavior is incorrect. It is quite surprising for a lexical variable to shadow a macro definition.
Daniel
parenscript-devel mailing list parenscript-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/parenscript-devel
Given the recent bug fixes, I tried to upgrade PS again. I'm now encountering an error on trying to expand a simple loop form. The error appears in commit 5a69278.
(ps-macroexpand '(loop for x from 1 below 10 do (bah)))
=> (NIL . #<Anonymous Function #x300042319FEF>) is not of type (OR SYMBOL FUNCTION), and can't be FUNCALLed or APPLYed [Condition of type TYPE-ERROR]
Daniel
On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Vladimir Sedach vsedach@gmail.com wrote:
Just pushed out a patch that fixes this. The solution turned out to be a lot more involved than I originally suspected - basically the PS compiler had to be refactored to give control of macroexpansion over to special forms (the way it was previously handling macroexpansion was quite naive, but would have been suitable for a single-namespace Lisp).
The changes that have been going on in the recent while are starting to make Parenscript almost look like a "real Lisp compiler."
Vladimir
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Daniel Gackle danielgackle@gmail.com wrote:
Here's one thing that the latest PS breaks in our code.
(ps (list 1 2 3)) => "[1,2,3];"
(ps (let ((list nil)) (setf list (list 1 2 3)))) => "var list5180 = null; list5180 = list5180(1, 2, 3);"
I think this behavior is incorrect. It is quite surprising for a lexical variable to shadow a macro definition.
Daniel
parenscript-devel mailing list parenscript-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/parenscript-devel
parenscript-devel mailing list parenscript-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/parenscript-devel
Start with a clean Lisp image or set *ps-macro-toplevel* to an empty hash table - that error is due to the fact that the PS internal macro representations have changed.
Vladimir
On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 8:40 PM, Daniel Gackle danielgackle@gmail.com wrote:
Given the recent bug fixes, I tried to upgrade PS again. I'm now encountering an error on trying to expand a simple loop form. The error appears in commit 5a69278.
(ps-macroexpand '(loop for x from 1 below 10 do (bah)))
=> (NIL . #<Anonymous Function #x300042319FEF>) is not of type (OR SYMBOL FUNCTION), and can't be FUNCALLed or APPLYed [Condition of type TYPE-ERROR]
Daniel
On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Vladimir Sedach vsedach@gmail.com wrote:
Just pushed out a patch that fixes this. The solution turned out to be a lot more involved than I originally suspected - basically the PS compiler had to be refactored to give control of macroexpansion over to special forms (the way it was previously handling macroexpansion was quite naive, but would have been suitable for a single-namespace Lisp).
The changes that have been going on in the recent while are starting to make Parenscript almost look like a "real Lisp compiler."
Vladimir
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Daniel Gackle danielgackle@gmail.com wrote:
Here's one thing that the latest PS breaks in our code.
(ps (list 1 2 3)) => "[1,2,3];"
(ps (let ((list nil)) (setf list (list 1 2 3)))) => "var list5180 = null; list5180 = list5180(1, 2, 3);"
I think this behavior is incorrect. It is quite surprising for a lexical variable to shadow a macro definition.
Daniel
parenscript-devel mailing list parenscript-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/parenscript-devel
parenscript-devel mailing list parenscript-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/parenscript-devel
parenscript-devel mailing list parenscript-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/parenscript-devel
Oops sorry, I must have neglected to clean some fasls.
On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 9:04 PM, Vladimir Sedach vsedach@gmail.com wrote:
Start with a clean Lisp image or set *ps-macro-toplevel* to an empty hash table - that error is due to the fact that the PS internal macro representations have changed.
Vladimir
On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 8:40 PM, Daniel Gackle danielgackle@gmail.com wrote:
Given the recent bug fixes, I tried to upgrade PS again. I'm now encountering an error on trying to expand a simple loop form. The error appears in commit 5a69278.
(ps-macroexpand '(loop for x from 1 below 10 do (bah)))
=> (NIL . #<Anonymous Function #x300042319FEF>) is not of type (OR SYMBOL FUNCTION),
and
can't be FUNCALLed or APPLYed [Condition of type TYPE-ERROR]
Daniel
On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Vladimir Sedach vsedach@gmail.com
wrote:
Just pushed out a patch that fixes this. The solution turned out to be a lot more involved than I originally suspected - basically the PS compiler had to be refactored to give control of macroexpansion over to special forms (the way it was previously handling macroexpansion was quite naive, but would have been suitable for a single-namespace Lisp).
The changes that have been going on in the recent while are starting to make Parenscript almost look like a "real Lisp compiler."
Vladimir
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Daniel Gackle danielgackle@gmail.com wrote:
Here's one thing that the latest PS breaks in our code.
(ps (list 1 2 3)) => "[1,2,3];"
(ps (let ((list nil)) (setf list (list 1 2 3)))) => "var list5180 = null; list5180 = list5180(1, 2, 3);"
I think this behavior is incorrect. It is quite surprising for a
lexical
variable to shadow a macro definition.
Daniel
parenscript-devel mailing list parenscript-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/parenscript-devel
parenscript-devel mailing list parenscript-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/parenscript-devel
parenscript-devel mailing list parenscript-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/parenscript-devel
parenscript-devel mailing list parenscript-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/parenscript-devel
parenscript-devel@common-lisp.net
-
Daniel Gackle -
Vladimir Sedach