Chicken doesn't seem to recognize command-line-arguments. I've tried compiling the .scm and running (display (command-line-arguments)) and it throws unbound variable every time. I've reinstalled from the Void Linux repository.
You will have found the documentation for command-line-arguments on the documentation for the module (chicken process-context). These modules aren't loaded by default in CHICKEN 5, as opposed to CHICKEN 4 (where it was quite ill-defined what was loaded there by default).
In CHICKEN 5, as is documented in the manual page explaining about Modules, by default only scheme, (chicken base) and (chicken syntax) are available to a program. Anything else you will need to explicitly import.
So, long story short, your program needs a (import (chicken process-context)) at the start, that should fix it!
Related
I need to compile a Chicken Scheme project containing multiple source files, but I'm getting errors.
According to the manual and this SO answer, I need to put (declare)s in my sources. Why the compiler can't just see that I'm importing the other source is beyond me, but meh.
The problem is, even if I put the (declare)s in, the compiler complains about the (import)s and (use)s.
infinity.filesystem.scm:
(use bindings filepath posix)
(declare (uses infinity.general.scm))
(load-relative "infinity.general.scm")
(module infinity.filesystem (with-open-file make-absolute-path with-temporary-directory with-chdir)
(import scheme filepath posix infinity.general)
(begin-for-syntax
(use bindings chicken)
(import infinity.general))
...etc...
infinity.general.scm:
(declare (unit infinity.general.scm))
(require-extension srfi-1 srfi-13 format data-structures ansi-escape-sequences basic-sequences)
(module infinity.general (bind+ format-ansi repeat-string join-strings pop-chars! inc! dec!
take* drop* take-right* drop-right* ends-with? take-where)
(import scheme chicken srfi-1 srfi-13 data-structures ansi-escape-sequences basic-sequences bindings ports format)
...etc...
Command:
$ csc -uses bindings.o -uses infinity.general.o -c infinity.filesystem.scm -o infinity.filesystem.o
Compiler says:
Syntax error (import): cannot import from undefined module
and
unbound variable: use
If I just remove the import and use declarations for "infinity.general", the file compiles. However, I have two problems with this:
Will the resulting .o file actually work, in the absence of import and use clauses? Or will it complain about missing code at runtime?
csi requires that my code contains (import) and (use) declarations, whereas csc requires that it does not. I, however, require that my code works in both csi and csc!
How can I solve this, please?
Why the compiler can't just see that I'm importing the other source is beyond me, but meh.
Declares are used to determine dependencies: the compiler needs to know in what order (and if at all) to invoke a particular toplevel, to ensure the right code is initialized before any of the globals from that unit can be used. When everything is being compiled separately, the compiler wouldn't know when to insert calls to toplevels. The -uses switch you pass to csc is redundant: csc -uses foo is equivalent to putting (declare (uses foo)) in the source code. Passing -uses foo.o doesn't do anything with the file foo.o as far as I can tell.
In your code snippet, you're using load, which is not the correct way to include code at compile-time: load will read and evaluate the target file at run time. Instead, you should omit the load completely: the declare already takes care of the dependency; you just need to link them together.
Also, it's not very common to use filenames as module/unit names, though it should work.
If I just remove the import and use declarations for "infinity.general", the file compiles. However, I have two problems with this:
1) Will the resulting .o file actually work, in the absence of import and use clauses? Or will it complain about missing code at runtime?
You'll need to keep the import expressions, or the program shouldn't compile. If it does compile, there's something strange going on. You don't need use when you link everything together statically. If you're using dynamic linking, you will get a runtime error.
The error you get about unbound variable: use is because you're using use in a begin-for-syntax block. You'll probably just need to (import-for-syntax chicken), as per your other SO question.
2) csi requires that my code contains (import) and (use) declarations, whereas csc requires that it does not. I, however, require that my code works in both csi and csc!
It looks like you're approaching this too quickly: You are writing a complete program and at the same time trying to make it run compiled and interpreted, without first building an understanding of how the system works.
At this point, it's probably a good idea to experiment first with a tiny project consisting of two files. Then you can figure out how to compile an executable that works from code that also works in the interpreter. Then, use this knowledge to build the actual program. If at any point something breaks, you can always go back to the minimal case and figure out what you're doing differently.
This will also help in getting support, as you would be able to present a complete, but minimal set of files, and people will be able to tell you much quicker where you went wrong, or whether you've found a bug.
I'm a little hazy on the differences between (use) and (import) in Chicken. Similarly, how do (load), (require) and (require-extension) differ?
These things don't seem to be mentioned much on the website.
Load and require are purely run-time, procedural actions. Load accepts a string argument and loads the file with that name (which can be source or compiled code) into the running Scheme, so that whatever it defines becomes available. Require does the same thing, but checks if the file has already been loaded by seeing if provide has been called on the same name (typically by the file as it is loaded). They are relatively rare in Scheme programming, corresponding to plug-ins in other languages, where code unknown at compile time needs to be loaded. See the manual page for unit eval for more details.
Import is concerned with modules rather than files. It looks for the named module, which must have already been loaded (but see below for Chicken 5), and makes the names exported from that module visible in the current context. In order to successfully import a module, there must be an import library for it. It is syntax, so the module name must appear explicitly in the call and cannot be computed at run time. See the manual page on modules for more details.
Require-library does the Right Thing to load code. If the code is already part of the running Scheme, either because it is built into Chicken, it does nothing. Otherwise it will load a core library unit if there is one, or will call require as a last resort. At compile time, it does analogous things to make sure that the environment will be correct at run time. See the "Non-standard macros and special forms" page in the manual for more details.
Use does a require-library followed by an import on the same name. It is the most common way to add functionality to your Chicken program. However, we write (import scheme) and (import chicken) because the functionality of these modules is already loaded. Require-extension is an exact synonym for use, provided for SRFI 55 compatibility. In R7RS mode, import is also a synonym for use.
Update for Chicken 5
Use has been removed from the language, and import now does what use used to do: it loads (if necessary) and then imports. Require-extension is consequently now a synonym for import.
In addition, Chicken-specific procedures and macros have been broken into modules with names like (chicken base) and (chicken bitwise).
Let's say I have a library foo in foo.scm like so:
(module foo (bar)
(import scheme)
(define (bar arg)
(+ 5 arg)))
And I have a program program.scm:
(use foo)
(display (bar 2))
Now, I compile foo and generate the import library using csc -J -library foo.scm, and then compile program with csc program.scm. Running program displays "7", as expected and everything is dandy. However, I want to load program interactively in the interpreter (csi), but now for some reason each call to a function in foo has to be prefixed with foo#, i.e. in the interpreter (foo#bar 2) works, but (bar 2) doesn't even though it works when used in a source file.
Why is this? Not only is this slightly annoying, I'm also afraid that I may have a misunderstanding of how the module system works in Chicken, so any clarification would be much appreciated.
I'm not sure what you mean by "load the program into the interpreter", but usually (use foo) should load and import the library, so performing (load "program.scm") should do just that, and all the things exported by foo should be available at toplevel.
It sounds like you somehow ended up with a situation where the library has been loaded into the running system, but hasn't been imported for use at toplevel. Just typing (use foo) (or even (import foo)) at the REPL should fix this problem.
CHICKEN's module system has been designed to allow for separate compilation, which makes cross-compilation possible. To make this work, the import library and actual implementation have been separated, but this complicates things a little, as you've discovered. This is needed because the import library may define macros that are needed at compile-time, so it needs to run on the cross-compiling host, whereas the library itself will need to be available in the cross-compilation target's architecture. We're discussing on how to simplify this for CHICKEN 5, as this is something that confuses many beginners (and sometimes advanced users, too).
I've got a bunch of "legacy" Guile Scheme code that I want to get running in the Racket Scheme IDE. There appear to be enough differences to make this a non-trivial exercise. (My level of Scheme knowledge is the level to complete the The Little Schemer).
My question is:
What are the differences between Guile Scheme and Standard Scheme (in the Racket IDE)?
In light of these differences, in general, what are the steps I'll need to take to convert some Guile Scheme Code to standard Scheme?
Additional: (happy with divergence between Racket Scheme and R5RS/R6RS) - what I want is to get 'something' to run in the Racket IDE - rather than the Racket language.
If by "Standard Scheme (in the Racket IDE)," you mean the Racket language, i.e., what you get when you prefix your code with #lang racket, then the top four differences to look out for are:
a different module system
a different macro system (depending on how old your code is)
immutable cons-cells (unless you import mutable ones)
no one-armed ifs in Racket (use when)
To port code from Guile to Racket, find out which files are "at the bottom" of your dependencies, i.e., find the files that do not depend on other files.
Open such a file in Racket, add the line #lang racket at the top, and try to run it.
You will most likely encounter some "unbound identifier" errors.
If you are lucky, the function is present in Racket, but not included in the "racket" language. Search for the name in the Racket documentation, and if you find it, then use (require ...) to import the name into your program.
Then run the program again to find the next error.
Some function are named differently in Guile and Racket, so look up the name in the Guile documentation and see what it does. Then open the Racket documentation on the same subject, and see what it is called in Racket.
In some cases you may have to make bigger changes. If you can't find some piece of functionality in the Racket documentation, then try asking the mailing list. It could be that it simply has a different name, or that somebody implemented it and put it on PLaneT (thus it will no appear in the documentation until you have installed the package).
Example of importing srfi/1 into the R5RS language.
#lang r5rs
(#%require srfi/1)
(xcons 1 2)
Differences from R4RS code to modern Scheme?
One thing to look out for is that in R4RS the empty list '() counted as false, not it is interpreted as true.
See this question for more things to look out for:
Running SICP Pattern Matching Rule Based Substitution Code
See also this list of changes from the R5RS standard:
List of changes from R4RS to R5RS
I'm trying to work my way through Compilers: Backend to Frontend (and Back to Front Again) by Abdulaziz Ghuloum. It seems abbreviated from what one would expect in a full course/seminar, so I'm trying to fill in the pieces myself.
For instance, I have tried to use his testing framework in the R5RS flavor of DrScheme, but it doesn't seem to like the macro stuff:
src/ghuloum/tests/tests-driver.scm:6:4: read: illegal use of open square bracket
I've read his intro paper on the course, An Incremental Approach to Compiler Construction, which gives a great overview of the techniques used, and mentions a couple of Schemes with features one might want to implement for 'extra credit', but he doesn't mention the Scheme he uses in the course.
Update
I'm still digging into the original question (investigating options such as Petit Scheme suggested by Eli below), but found an interesting link relating to Gholoum's work, so I am including it here.
[Ikarus Scheme](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ikarus_(Scheme_implementation)) is the actual implementation of Ghuloum's ideas, and appears to have been part of his Ph.D. work. It's supposed to be one of the first implementations of R6RS. I'm trying to install Ikarus now, but the configure script doesn't want to recognize my system's install of libgmp.so, so my problems are still unresolved.
Example
The following example seems to work in PLT 2.4.2 running in DrEd using the Pretty Big
(require lang/plt-pretty-big)
(load "/Users/donaldwakefield/ghuloum/tests/tests-driver.scm")
(load "/Users/donaldwakefield/ghuloum/tests/tests-1.1-req.scm")
(define (emit-program x)
(unless (integer? x) (error "---"))
(emit " .text")
(emit " .globl scheme_entry")
(emit " .type scheme_entry, #function")
(emit "scheme_entry:")
(emit " movl $~s, %eax" x)
(emit " ret")
)
Attempting to replace the require directive with #lang scheme results in the error message
foo.scm:7:3: expand: unbound identifier in module in: emit
which appears to be due to a failure to load tests-driver.scm. Attempting to use #lang r6rs disables the REPL, which I'd really like to use, so I'm going to try to continue with Pretty Big.
My thanks to Eli Barzilay for his patient help.
The language he uses is most likely Chez Scheme. Regardless, the R5RS language in PLT is a pretty strict version of R5RS, with extensions like square brackets throwing errors -- and you may get more mileage using the default #lang scheme language. (Or, if that fails, try and see if you can work with Petit -- the free version of Chez.)
You can see setup instructions for running it here on Ubuntu x86.
The installation download for Petite Scheme are here.