[racket] Strange macro behavior with set! and syntax-local-introduce

We have a work around. (In the larger program there is one is that comes
from the input and one that doesn't. We can just bind it to a pair instead.)

This program seems quite suspicious. I can't quite bring myself to call it
a bug because it is sucks widely used part of things tho!

Robby

On Thursday, May 15, 2014, Matthias Felleisen <matthias at ccs.neu.edu> wrote:

>
>
> On May 15, 2014, at 5:56 PM, Robby Findler wrote:
>
> How does this help us understand the original, strange program?
>
>
> I am providing a work-around because I recognize the idiom.
> I can't explain the original.
>
>
>
> On May 15, 2014, at 6:23 PM, Spencer Florence wrote:
>
> I'm not sure how gensym fixes this:
>
>
>
> Not #f, stx:
>
> (define-syntax (make-funny-set! stx)
>   (syntax-parse stx
>     [(_ v) #`(define #,(begin (set! funny (datum->syntax stx (gensym)))
> funny) v)]))
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> #lang racket
>
> (require (for-syntax syntax/parse racket/syntax racket/format))
>
> (define-for-syntax funny #f)
>
> (define-syntax (make-funny-set! stx)
>   (syntax-parse stx
>     [(_ v) #`(define #,(begin (set! funny (datum->syntax #f (gensym)))
> funny) v)]))
>
> (define-syntax (funny-ref stx)
>   (syntax-parse stx
>     [(_) funny]))
>
> (define-syntax (funny-set! stx)
>   (syntax-parse stx
>     [(_ v) #`(set! #,funny v)]))
>
> (make-funny-set! 2)
> (void (void (void (funny-set! 3))))
> (funny-ref)
>
> errors with:
>
>   g27591: unbound identifier;
>    also, no #%top syntax transformer is bound in: g27591
>
> regardless of how many calls to void there are (inclusive of 0). This
> makes sense, as the syntax marks don't add up. The calls to
> "syntax-local-introduce" in the original program aught to solve this, but
> as we saw... `/me points to robby's email`
>
>
>
> And removing the datum->syntax errors with:
>
>   funny-ref: received value from syntax expander was not syntax
>     received: 'g27876
>
> Which also makes sense: a symbol is not Syntax.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Robby Findler <
> robby at eecs.northwestern.edu> wrote:
>
> How does this help us understand the original, strange program?
>
> Robby
>
> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 4:51 PM, Matthias Felleisen
> <matthias at ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Then use gensym instead of g and "~a" instead.
> >
> >
> >
> > On May 15, 2014, at 5:38 PM, Matthias Felleisen <matthias at ccs.neu.edu>
> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Did you want this:
> >>
> >> #lang racket
> >>
> >> (require (for-syntax syntax/parse racket/syntax))
> >>
> >> (define-for-syntax funny #f)
> >>
> >> (define-syntax (make-funny-set! stx)
> >>  (syntax-parse stx
> >>    [(_ v) #`(define #,(begin (set! funny (format-id stx "g")) funny)
> v)]))
> >>
> >> (define-syntax (funny-ref stx)
> >>  (syntax-parse stx
> >>    [(_) funny]))
> >>
> >> (define-syntax (funny-set! stx)
> >>  (syntax-parse stx
> >>    [(_ v) #`(set! #,funny v)]))
> >>
> >> (make-funny-set! 2)
> >> (void (void (void (funny-set! 3))))
> >> (funny-ref)
> >>
> >> [I had to write such a macro a while back, and the above is roughly
> what I remember doing. Note the lexical context]
> >>
> >>
> >> On May 15, 2014, at 5:25 PM, Spencer Florence <spencer at florence.io>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I'm attempting to write a macro which introduces a new id, then
> another macro that set!s that id.
> >>> Example:
> >>>
> >>> #lang racket
> >>> (require (for-syntax syntax/parse racket/syntax))
> >>> (define-for-syntax funny #f)
> >>> (define-syntax (make-funny-set! stx)
> >>>  (syntax-parse stx
> >>>    [(_ v)
> >>>     (define unmarked (generate-temporary))
> >>>     (set! funny (syntax-local-introduce unmarked))
> >>>     #`(define #,unmarked v)]))
> >>> (define-syntax (funny-ref stx)
> >>>  (syntax-parse stx
> >>>    [(_)
> >>>     funny]))
> >>> (define-syntax (funny-set! stx)
> >>>  (syntax-parse stx
> >>>    [(_ v)
> >>>     #`(set! #,(syntax-local-introduce funny) v)]))
> >>>
> >>> (make-funny-set! 2)
> >>> (funny-set! 3)
> >>> (funny-ref)
> >>>
> >>> This program works as I expect, evaluating to 3. However if I change
> (funny-set! 3) to (void (funny-set! 3)) I get the error: "set!: unbound
> identifier in module in: g1"
> >>>
> >>> I do not get this error if I change (funny-ref) to (void (funny-ref)).
> >>>
> >>> If I look at the expansion of the (void (funny-set! 3)) program in
> drracket's macro stepper the the g1 in (define g1 2) and the g1 in (void
> (set! g1 3)) have the
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/attachments/20140515/0c651a83/attachment.html>