[plt-scheme] find-method/who

On Mar 22, 2005, at 1:20 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
>
>
>> By the way, is there a way to inspect the certificates of a syntax
>> object directly?
>
> Not currently.

I've spent some time debugging syntax certificates recently, and I've 
got a small proposed change.  The following code tries to do a bad 
thing, by pulling 'a' out of its certified context.

(module hides-a mzscheme
   (define a #t); secret!

   (provide ref-to-a)
   (define-syntax (ref-to-a stx)
     (syntax-case stx ()
       [(_) #`(if a 79 297)])))

(current-code-inspector (make-inspector (current-code-inspector))) ; 
remove privileges from later code

(module tries-to-see-a mzscheme
   (require hides-a)

   (define a-stx (expand #`(ref-to-a)))
   (printf "value of a: ~v\n"
           (eval (syntax-case a-stx ()
                   [(i a-ref c d)
                    (syntax-recertify #`a-ref a-stx 
(current-code-inspector) #f)]))))

(require tries-to-see-a)

=> compile: access from an uncertified context to unexported variable 
from module: hides-a in: a

The location of the error is given as the 'eval'.

My proposal is this: rather than having the syntax-recertify fail 
silently, producing an uncertified syntax-object, I would rather that 
syntax-recertify raised an exception when the supplied inspector was 
not powerful enough to transfer a certificate.

The problem is that when I see an error like the above, I can't tell 
whether it's because I didn't call recertify in the right place, or 
because my inspector wasn't strong enough.

I don't believe that the current behavior is documented, so it 
shouldn't be the case that client code depends on this behavior.  
Perhaps MzScheme depends on the current behavior?


john
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2430 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/attachments/20050322/c5734564/attachment.p7s>