[debbugs-tracker] bug#11196: closed (missing constructor procedure in new srfi-9 records)

[GNU bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Tue, 10 Apr 2012 00:19:12 +0200
with message-id <address@hidden>
and subject line Re: bug#11196: missing constructor procedure in new srfi-9 
records
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #11196,
regarding missing constructor procedure in new srfi-9 records
to be marked as done.

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


-- 
11196: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=11196
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact address@hidden with problems
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> missing constructor procedure in new srfi-9 records
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Sat, 7 Apr 2012 21:54:34 +0200 (CEST)
>
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> ;;;; A short example script to describe the problem:
>
> (use-modules (srfi srfi-9))
>
> ;; A simple record definition for example
> (define-record-type my-record
>   (make-my-record one two)
>   my-record?
>   (one my-one)
>   (two my-two))
>
> ;; "Normal" construction is working well
> (define r1 (make-my-record "1" "2"))
>
> ;; This should also work, but it doesn't!
> (define r2 ((record-constructor my-record) "1" "2"))
> => ERROR
>
> ;; Where's the constructor procedure?
> (display (record-constructor my-record)) (newline)
>
> => #f
>
>
> The bug is located in the new srfi-9.scm which forgets to set the
> record's constructor procedure.
> The following patch may help (hoping not to introduce new problems):
>
>
>
> --- srfi-9.scm  2012-04-06 16:52:02.000000000 +0200
> +++ srfi-9.scm  2012-04-06 17:14:36.000000000 +0200
> @@ -188,7 +188,9 @@
>         (let* ((fields      (field-identifiers #'(field-spec ...)))
>                (field-count (length fields))
>                (layout      (string-concatenate (make-list field-count 
> "pw")))
> -              (indices     (field-indices (map syntax->datum fields))))
> +              (indices     (field-indices (map syntax->datum fields)))
> +              (ctor-proc   (syntax-case #'constructor-spec ()
> +                             ((func args ...) (syntax func)))))
>           #`(begin
>               (define type-name
>                 (let ((rtd (make-struct/no-tail
> @@ -204,7 +206,7 @@
>                      (eq? (struct-vtable obj) type-name)))
>
>               #,(constructor #'type-name #'constructor-spec indices)
> -
> +             (struct-set! type-name (+ 2 vtable-offset-user) #,ctor-proc)
>               #,@(accessors #'type-name #'(field-spec ...) indices)))))))
>
>  ;;; srfi-9.scm ends here
>
>
>
>
> Cheers,
> Klaus Stehle
>
>
> ----------------------------
> guile --version
> guile (GNU Guile) 2.0.5
>
> uname -srm
> Linux 2.6.32-5-amd64 x86_64
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: bug#11196: missing constructor procedure in new srfi-9 records
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Tue, 10 Apr 2012 00:19:12 +0200
>
>
>
>
> User-agent: 
>
> Gnus/5.110018 (No Gnus v0.18) Emacs/24.0.93 (gnu/linux)
>
>
>
>
> Hi Klaus,
>
> Please forget my previous message.  SRFI-9 in Guile 2.0 _is_ actually
> implemented in terms of “Guile records”.  So I applied a patch similar
> to yours as commit 5ef102cc93a4f2eba0f5dad94a7306085b353000.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Ludo’.
>
>
> --- End Message ---