GNU bug report logs - #13966
Inconsistent truncation of multiple values, inlining issue?

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 13966 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 13966 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Daniel Llorens <daniel.llorens <at> bluewin.ch>
To: bug-guile <at> gnu.org
Subject: inlining issue?
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 13:57:26 +0100

Compare 

(define f (lambda (a) a))
(call-with-values (lambda () (values 3 3)) f)

vs

(call-with-values (lambda () (values 3 3)) (lambda (a) a))

The first one fails with

<unnamed port>:1:0: In procedure f:
<unnamed port>:1:0: Wrong number of arguments to #<procedure f (a)>

The second one gives 3. 

This is Guile 2.0.7.112-f5ea5.

The behavior of the first case makes (compose f g) fail when f takes less args tan g produces.

Regards

	Daniel

Message #8 received at 13966 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Daniel Llorens <daniel.llorens <at> bluewin.ch>
Cc: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>, 13966 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#13966: inlining issue?
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 14:55:35 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi Daniel,

Daniel Llorens <daniel.llorens <at> bluewin.ch> skribis:

> Compare 
>
> (define f (lambda (a) a))
> (call-with-values (lambda () (values 3 3)) f)
>
> vs
>
> (call-with-values (lambda () (values 3 3)) (lambda (a) a))
>
> The first one fails with
>
> <unnamed port>:1:0: In procedure f:
> <unnamed port>:1:0: Wrong number of arguments to #<procedure f (a)>
>
> The second one gives 3. 
>
> This is Guile 2.0.7.112-f5ea5.
>
> The behavior of the first case makes (compose f g) fail when f takes less args tan g produces.

That is unfortunate but I think the former is correct.

R5RS doesn’t say anything about the expected behavior when the producer
returns a number of values incompatible with what the consumer accepts.

R6RS says (Section 5.8):

  If the number of return values passed to a continuation created by a
  call to call-with-values is not accepted by its consumer that was
  passed in that call, then an exception is raised.

and Section 11.5:

  Consumer must be a procedure and should accept as many values as
  producer returns.

R7RS draft #6 uses equivalent wording (I think):

  Calls its producer argument with no values and a continuation that,
  when passed some values, calls the consumer procedure with those
  values as arguments.

This patch fixes peval to not inline

  (call-with-values (lambda () (values vals ...)) (lambda (args ...) ...))

when the length of ‘vals’ differs from that of ‘args’.

However, it’s not very elegant, IMO.  Andy?

Ludo’.

[Message part 2 (text/x-patch, inline)]

diff --git a/module/language/tree-il/peval.scm b/module/language/tree-il/peval.scm
index bf96179..25dded4 100644
--- a/module/language/tree-il/peval.scm
+++ b/module/language/tree-il/peval.scm
@@ -1155,6 +1155,25 @@ top-level bindings from ENV and return the resulting expression."
           (simplify-conditional
            (make-conditional src c (for-tail subsequent)
                              (for-tail alternate))))))
+
+      (($ <application> src
+          ($ <primitive-ref> _ '@call-with-values)
+          (($ <lambda> _ _
+              ($ <lambda-case> _
+                 () #f #f #f () ()
+                 ($ <application> _ ($ <primitive-ref> _ 'values)
+                    (produced ...))
+                 #f))
+           ($ <lambda> _ _
+              (and consumer
+                   ($ <lambda-case> _
+                      (? (negate (compose (cute = <> (length produced))
+                                          length)))
+                      #f #f #f () gensyms body #f)))))
+       ;; Producer is (values args ...) but consumer expects a different
+       ;; number of values, which is an error.
+       exp)
+
       (($ <application> src
           ($ <primitive-ref> _ '@call-with-values)
           (producer

Message #15 received at 13966-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>
To: Daniel Llorens <daniel.llorens <at> bluewin.ch>
Cc: 13966-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#13966: inlining issue?
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 22:06:53 +0200

On Fri 15 Mar 2013 13:57, Daniel Llorens <daniel.llorens <at> bluewin.ch> writes:

> Compare 
>
> (define f (lambda (a) a))
> (call-with-values (lambda () (values 3 3)) f)
>
> vs
>
> (call-with-values (lambda () (values 3 3)) (lambda (a) a))
>
> The first one fails with
>
> <unnamed port>:1:0: In procedure f:
> <unnamed port>:1:0: Wrong number of arguments to #<procedure f (a)>
>
> The second one gives 3. 
>
> This is Guile 2.0.7.112-f5ea5.
>
> The behavior of the first case makes (compose f g) fail when f takes less args tan g produces.

Fixed in fff013215fb1a5d211df5037dcf52c92063050a8 on master.

Thanks for the report!

Andy

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.