[parenscript-devel] Parenscript 2.3 compilation problem

[Erik Huelsmann]

Hi all,

After a night's sleep, I found the problem in ABCL this morning: the LET
operator expression definer has a function called VAR, which is also a
macro. This confuses ABCL. We'll fix that. Parenscript will compile nicely
after that.

The point that the VAR macro may expand to non-conforming code remains,
however.

Bye,


Erik.

On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 10:00 PM, Erik Huelsmann <ehuels at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> This week, Alessio Stalla and I are trying to get Parenscript to compile on
> ABCL. We're using Parenscript 2.3 as distributed with Quicklisp.
>
> Parenscript 2.2 worked fine, after fixing a potential readtables issue.
> However, Parenscript 2.3 fails compilation during the compilation of the
> (DEFINE-EXPRESSION-OPERATOR LET # ...) toplevel form.
>
> The problem is that it generates an expression (VAR X), which is then
> expanded to (DEFPARAMETER X). However, that's non-conforming because the
> initial value is required according to the CLHS. Looking at the definition
> of the VAR macro, I see the problem:
>
> (defmacro VAR (name &optional value docstring)
>   `(defparameter ,name ,@(when value (list value)) ...))
>
> can indeed lead to a (DEFPAMETER X)
>
>
> I haven't found out if/why this isn't a problem on Parenscript 2.2 or why
> Parenscript 2.3 would cleanly compile on SBCL, because - like ABCL - it
> rejects forms like that.
>
>
> If it is ABCL that's broken here, could you help us fix it? If not, could
> you fix parenscript to work on ABCL?
>
> I'm eager to learn about your analysis of the situation. If you need help
> on settin up ABCL, I'll gladly provide it.
>
>
> Bye,
>
> Erik
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.common-lisp.net/pipermail/parenscript-devel/attachments/20110821/c4365de1/attachment.html>