Re: Two r6rs bugs

[Mark H Weaver]

Hi Ian,

Ian Price <address@hidden> writes:
> The second one is a change to resolve-r6rs-interface. Previously
> mark-weaver [0], changes this so that it would correctly look up
> submodules under the srfi namespace, but in doing so took into account
> the srfi 97[1] library name, which it should not have done. I have added a
> comment to this effect in the source.

Indeed, good catch!  However, I'd prefer to fix this differently.
See below.

> From 3c73a30c89e005927dcd6239b54e752c05c2a48f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Ian Price <address@hidden>
> Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 10:16:44 +0000
> Subject: [PATCH 2/2] R6RS srfi library names should ignore first identifier
>  after the :n
>
> * module/ice-9/r6rs-libraries.scm (resolve-r6rs-interface):
>   (srfi :n name ids ...) -> (srfi srfi-n ids ...)
> * test-suite/tests/rnrs-libraries.test ("srfi"): Add test.
> ---
>  module/ice-9/r6rs-libraries.scm      |    6 +++++-
>  test-suite/tests/rnrs-libraries.test |    4 +++-
>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/module/ice-9/r6rs-libraries.scm b/module/ice-9/r6rs-libraries.scm
> index 019a6a7..9fef7a2 100644
> --- a/module/ice-9/r6rs-libraries.scm
> +++ b/module/ice-9/r6rs-libraries.scm
> @@ -40,7 +40,11 @@
>                       (substring (symbol->string (syntax->datum #'colon-n))
>                                  1)))))
>         (resolve-r6rs-interface
> -        #`(library (srfi #,srfi-n rest ... (version ...))))))
> +        (if (null? #'(rest ...))
> +            #`(library (srfi #,srfi-n (version ...)))
> +            ;; SRFI 97 says that the first identifier after the colon-n
> +            ;; is used for the libraries name, so it must be ignored.
> +            #`(library (srfi #,srfi-n #,@(cdr #'(rest ...)) (version 
> ...)))))))

Instead of using 'null?' and 'cdr' on the syntax object, can you please
rework this to use 'syntax-case'?  I.e. instead of (if (null? ...) ...)
do this:

  (syntax-case #'(rest ...) ()
    (() <null-case>)
    ((name rest ...) <non-null-case>))

What do you think?

Other than that, it looks good to me.

    Thanks,
      Mark