Re: [Chicken-users] Internal compiler error on use bindings

[Peter Bex]

On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 01:11:14PM +0000, Mark Carter wrote:
> Here's one for your mystery file:
> 
> foo.scm:
>       (use bindings)
>       (bind (a b c) '(1 2 3)
>                       (print a))
>       (write-line "Finished")
> 
> 
> $ csj -bq foo.scm
> 1
> Finished
> 
> BUT:
> 
> $ csc foo.scm
> 
> Error: [internal compiler error] type of literal not supported: #<procedure>
> 
>         Call history:
> 
>         <syntax>          (##core#begin (write-line "Finished"))
>         <syntax>          (write-line "Finished")       <--

That's a bug in the bind egg.  It is a macro that returns procedure
objects instead of the name that refers to the procedure.

In the interpreter that's allowed but the compiler doesn't know
how to serialize them.

You can easily see this in the interpreter by typing ,x (bind ...):
#;2> ,x         (bind (a b c) '(1 2 3)                                          
                                                                                
 
                (print a))                                                      
                                                                         
(##core#let
  ((a ('#<procedure> '(1 2 3) 0))
   (b ('#<procedure> '(1 2 3) 1))
   (c ('#<procedure> '(1 2 3) 2)))
  (if (and ('#<procedure> ('#<procedure> '(1 2 3) 3)))
    (begin (print a))
    (#%error
      'bind
      (#%sprintf
        "(sub)sequence in ~A too long to match (sub)pattern in ~A~%"
        '(1 2 3)
        '(a b c)))))

The if for example is easy to fix:
(and ,@(map (lambda (x) `(',empty? ,x)) checks))
I think this should be:
(and ,@(map (lambda (x) `(empty? ,x)) checks))

I don't know if Juergen (the "bindings" maintainer) is reading this
mailinglist, otherwise it's probably a good idea to file a bug in trac
and/or mail him about it.

Cheers,
Peter
-- 
http://sjamaan.ath.cx
--
"The process of preparing programs for a digital computer
 is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically
 and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic
 experience much like composing poetry or music."
                                                        -- Donald Knuth