emacs-bug-tracker
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

[debbugs-tracker] bug#10246: closed (R6RS library form broken?)


From: GNU bug Tracking System
Subject: [debbugs-tracker] bug#10246: closed (R6RS library form broken?)
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2011 20:07:01 +0000

Your message dated Thu, 08 Dec 2011 21:05:34 +0100
with message-id <address@hidden>
and subject line Re: bug#10246: R6RS library form broken?
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #10246,
regarding R6RS library form broken?
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
address@hidden)


-- 
10246: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=10246
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact address@hidden with problems
--- Begin Message --- Subject: R6RS library form broken? Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 18:53:59 +0100
Hi,

I'm running the latest git version (2.0.3.244-04ec29).
Declaring a R6RS style library doesn't work:

(library (foo))

=>
ice-9/psyntax.scm:1422:30: In procedure expand-macro:
ice-9/psyntax.scm:1422:30: Syntax error:
source expression failed to match any pattern in form (library (foo))


while this does:

(define-module (foo))



--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- Subject: Re: bug#10246: R6RS library form broken? Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2011 21:05:34 +0100 User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.3 (gnu/linux)
On Thu 08 Dec 2011 00:00, Ian Price <address@hidden> writes:

> Tobias Brandt <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> (library (foo))
>
> This is a misunderstanding on your part, I'm afraid. R6RS library forms
> are intended to wrap the code[0]; they are not declarations to be placed at
> the top. The manual does mention this[1], by noting the syntax for library
> is
>
> (library name (export export-spec ...) (import import-spec ...) body ...)

Indeed.  Thanks for the answer, Ian.

In the new email-happy bug system, to close a bug you edit the Cc: list
to add -done after the bug number, as I have done here.  Feel free to do
this for any bug that you feel is done; if we make a mistake, we can
simply re-open it.

I'm sure we could do better accounting as to the kind of resolution and
such, but I'm most concern with simply marking bugs as being resolved.

Regards, and happy hacking to you both :-)

Andy
-- 
http://wingolog.org/


--- End Message ---

reply via email to

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