bug#50068: closed (Curried definitions lose docstrings)

[GNU bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Mon, 29 Aug 2022 18:10:30 +0200
with message-id <45ABDE64-579F-4544-9511-CFAD0EAB3CF3@sarc.name>
and subject line Re: bug#50068: [PATCH] In curried definitions, move docstrings 
to outermost lambdas
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #50068,
regarding Curried definitions lose docstrings
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs@gnu.org.)


-- 
50068: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=50068
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs@gnu.org with problems
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Curried definitions lose docstrings
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Sun, 15 Aug 2021 12:13:28 +0200
>
>
>
>
> User-agent: 
>
> Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0
>
>
>
>
> When a docstring is used in the body of a curried definition,
> it ends up on the result of the application of the resulting
> curried function, not on the function itself. Example:
>
> (use-modules (ice-9 curried-definitions))
>
> (define ((curried a) b)
>   "Docstring of curried"
>   'whatever)
>
> (procedure-documentation curried)
> => #f
>
> (procedure-documentation (curried 'whatnot))
> => "Docstring of curried"
>
>
> This is apparently because Guile translates
>
> (define ((curried a) b)
>   ...)
>
> to
>
> (define (curried a)
>   (lambda (b)
>     ...))
>
> which puts the docstring in the body
> of lambda.
>
> Tested with Guile 2.2 and 3.0.5.
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: bug#50068: [PATCH] In curried definitions, move docstrings to outermost lambdas
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Mon, 29 Aug 2022 18:10:30 +0200
>
>
>
>
> Applied in 61d8dab8eafd498306ce618582aab37497df77b4. Thank you!
>
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---