Juillet 2016 - Gambit-list - mailman.iro.umontreal.ca

How pipe from shell to gsc ('s repl)?
by Adam 14 Jul '16

14 Jul '16

Marc, How do I pipe commands into Gambit on "all" unices? The "-e" argument is not universal so I may just want to pipe to Gambit's stdin. The following just brings you a REPL with no input made to it, and you do the typing - does Gambit use some very exotic means of console input, or does it empty its read buffer at start?? If so why, and how do I make it simply use "stdin"? cat << 'eof' | gsc (display "Hello world\n") ,q eof Thanks

2 7

Does anyone else have thoughts on Gambit's C compiler argument evaluation behavior? Re: Is this the recommended way to inline shellscripts in |compile-file|'s cc/ld-options: arguments?
by Adam 13 Jul '16

13 Jul '16

Hi Gambit community, If I understood Gambit's current behavior right, then there's no way to (compile-file "irrelevant.scm" cc-options: "$(SYSTEM EXPLOIT CODE HERE)") . So Gambit's approach for this argument is similar to a SQL injection attack safety. This is not a big deal as compile-file probably never is exported to any untrusted user. However, for symmetry, it makes sense - so spontaneously, while it was a small surprise to me that the conveniency feature of cc-options: \"$(pkg-config --libs libjpeg\")" wouldn't work, on second thought I think the fact that it does not work is rather a feature than a bug, so I'm positive about the current behavior. Does anyone have an opinion? Thanks. 2016-07-13 13:56 GMT+08:00 Adam <adam.mlmb(a)gmail.com>: > Dear Marc, > > I'm in a nasty environment where I not can know what exact "-I" and "-l" > arguments the C compiler and linker need. > > For this reason, I need the pkg-config shell tool to figure it out for me! > > It would have seemed logical to me that |compile-file|'s |cc-options:| and > |ld-options:| would be evaluated by the system shell by the gambc-cc > script, so that this would work: > > echo '(print "Hello world\n")' > test.scm > > GAMBC_CC_VERBOSE=yes gsc > > (compile-file "test.scm" > cc-options: "$(pkg-config --cflags \"libjpeg\")" > ld-options: "$(pkg-config --libs \"libjpeg\")" > ) > > > However, it does not - but instead, the "$(p... strings are passed on > verbatim to the C compiler, leading to this output: > > gcc [...] -o "test.o1" $(pkg-config --cflags "libjpeg") test.c > $(pkg-config --libs "libjpeg") > gcc: error: $(pkg-config: No such file or directory > gcc: error: "libjpeg"): No such file or directory > gcc: error: $(pkg-config: No such file or directory > gcc: error: "libjpeg"): No such file or directory > gcc: error: unrecognized command line option ‘--cflags’ > gcc: error: unrecognized command line option ‘--libs’ > *** ERROR IN (console)(a)2.1 -- C compilation or link failed while compiling > "test.scm" > > > I.e. GCC actually gets a "$(pkg-config" argument, a "--cflags" argument > and a "\"libjpeg\"" argument, etc. . > > So this test is a total catastrophe. > > The question then comes, is this a bug or a feature? > > > I can totally see that it is your intended design of gsc+gambc-cc that > those arguments should be passed exactly verbatim all the way to the C > compiler, it makes sense, for instance as a correctness and a security > measure. > > So what I am asking here is if you have any thoughts about the convenience > factor, or if you have any design thought here or this just design choice > just was arbitrary. > > > Anyhow in the absence of shell-evaluation of pkg-config anywhere else, I > need to add it explicitly, meaning then that the compile-file command > should be: > > (compile-file "test.scm" > cc-options: (myshellrun "pkg-config --cflags \"libjpeg\"") > ld-options: (myshellrun "pkg-config --libs \"libjpeg\"") > ) > > > where myshellrun is a procedure that involves open-process and reads its > output to a string. > > Please confirm that this indeed is the intended best practice for solving > this problem. > > Thanks! > >

2 3

4.7.0 vs. 4.7.2 for LTE, opinions: Any bad experiences with 4.7.2 ever?
by Adam 13 Jul '16

13 Jul '16

Hi, 4.7.0 is cool. 4.7.2 I think is bug-free or essentially totally bug-free but I don't have any clear memory or anything. Did anyone have any bad experiences with 4.7.2 ever, over 4.7.0? Thanks

1 0

Is this the recommended way to inline shellscripts in |compile-file|'s cc/ld-options: arguments?
by Adam 13 Jul '16

13 Jul '16

Dear Marc, I'm in a nasty environment where I not can know what exact "-I" and "-l" arguments the C compiler and linker need. For this reason, I need the pkg-config shell tool to figure it out for me! It would have seemed logical to me that |compile-file|'s |cc-options:| and |ld-options:| would be evaluated by the system shell by the gambc-cc script, so that this would work: echo '(print "Hello world\n")' > test.scm GAMBC_CC_VERBOSE=yes gsc (compile-file "test.scm" cc-options: "$(pkg-config --cflags \"libjpeg\")" ld-options: "$(pkg-config --libs \"libjpeg\")" ) However, it does not - but instead, the "$(p... strings are passed on verbatim to the C compiler, leading to this output: gcc [...] -o "test.o1" $(pkg-config --cflags "libjpeg") test.c $(pkg-config --libs "libjpeg") gcc: error: $(pkg-config: No such file or directory gcc: error: "libjpeg"): No such file or directory gcc: error: $(pkg-config: No such file or directory gcc: error: "libjpeg"): No such file or directory gcc: error: unrecognized command line option ‘--cflags’ gcc: error: unrecognized command line option ‘--libs’ *** ERROR IN (console)(a)2.1 -- C compilation or link failed while compiling "test.scm" I.e. GCC actually gets a "$(pkg-config" argument, a "--cflags" argument and a "\"libjpeg\"" argument, etc. . So this test is a total catastrophe. The question then comes, is this a bug or a feature? I can totally see that it is your intended design of gsc+gambc-cc that those arguments should be passed exactly verbatim all the way to the C compiler, it makes sense, for instance as a correctness and a security measure. So what I am asking here is if you have any thoughts about the convenience factor, or if you have any design thought here or this just design choice just was arbitrary. Anyhow in the absence of shell-evaluation of pkg-config anywhere else, I need to add it explicitly, meaning then that the compile-file command should be: (compile-file "test.scm" cc-options: (myshellrun "pkg-config --cflags \"libjpeg\"") ld-options: (myshellrun "pkg-config --libs \"libjpeg\"") ) where myshellrun is a procedure that involves open-process and reads its output to a string. Please confirm that this indeed is the intended best practice for solving this problem. Thanks!

1 0

segfault on re-defining variable
by Vijay Mathew 06 Jul '16

06 Jul '16

Reproducing a session at the gambit REPL that led to a segmentation fault: $ uname -srmp Darwin 14.5.0 x86_64 i386 $ gsc Gambit v4.8.4 > (define xs '(1 2 3)) > (let* ((x (car xs)) (xs (cdr xs)) (y (car (xs))) (xs (cdr xs)) (z (car xs))) (+ x y z)) *** ERROR IN (console)(a)2.43 -- Operator is not a PROCEDURE ((2 3)) 1> xs (2 3) 1> (define xs '(1 2 3)) *** WARNING -- defining global variable: xs [1] 11502 segmentation fault gsc Also wondering why the `xs` in the `let*` bindings is referring to the global `xs`. Thanks, --Vijay

2 1

2nd CfP: IFL 2016 (28th Symposium on Implementation and Application of Functional Languages)
by publicityifl＠gmail.com 05 Jul '16

05 Jul '16

Hello, Please, find below the second call for papers for IFL 2016. Please forward these to anyone you think may be interested. Apologies for any duplicates you may receive. best regards, Jurriaan Hage Publicity Chair of IFL --- IFL 2016 - 2nd Call for papers 28th SYMPOSIUM ON IMPLEMENTATION AND APPLICATION OF FUNCTIONAL LANGUAGES - IFL 2016 KU Leuven, Belgium In cooperation with ACM SIGPLAN August 31 - September 2, 2016 https://dtai.cs.kuleuven.be/events/ifl2016/ Scope The goal of the IFL symposia is to bring together researchers actively engaged in the implementation and application of functional and function-based programming languages. IFL 2016 will be a venue for researchers to present and discuss new ideas and concepts, work in progress, and publication-ripe results related to the implementation and application of functional languages and function-based programming. Peer-review Following the IFL tradition, IFL 2016 will use a post-symposium review process to produce the formal proceedings. All participants of IFL 2016 are invited to submit either a draft paper or an extended abstract describing work to be presented at the symposium. At no time may work submitted to IFL be simultaneously submitted to other venues; submissions must adhere to ACM SIGPLAN's republication policy: http://www.sigplan.org/Resources/Policies/Republication The submissions will be screened by the program committee chair to make sure they are within the scope of IFL, and will appear in the draft proceedings distributed at the symposium. Submissions appearing in the draft proceedings are not peer-reviewed publications. Hence, publications that appear only in the draft proceedings are not subject to the ACM SIGPLAN republication policy. After the symposium, authors will be given the opportunity to incorporate the feedback from discussions at the symposium and will be invited to submit a revised full article for the formal review process. From the revised submissions, the program committee will select papers for the formal proceedings considering their correctness, novelty, originality, relevance, significance, and clarity. The formal proceedings will appear in the International Conference Proceedings Series of the ACM Digital Library. Important dates August 1: Submission deadline draft papers August 3: Notification of acceptance for presentation August 5: Early registration deadline August 12: Late registration deadline August 22: Submission deadline for pre-symposium proceedings August 31 - September 2: IFL Symposium December 1: Submission deadline for post-symposium proceedings January 31, 2017: Notification of acceptance for post-symposium proceedings March 15, 2017: Camera-ready version for post-symposium proceedings Submission details Prospective authors are encouraged to submit papers or extended abstracts to be published in the draft proceedings and to present them at the symposium. All contributions must be written in English. Papers must use the new ACM two columns conference format, which can be found at: http://www.acm.org/publications/proceedings-template For the pre-symposium proceedings we adopt a 'weak' page limit of 12 pages. For the post-symposium proceedings the page limit of 12 pages is firm. Authors submit through EasyChair: https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=ifl2016 Topics IFL welcomes submissions describing practical and theoretical work as well as submissions describing applications and tools in the context of functional programming. If you are not sure whether your work is appropriate for IFL 2016, please contact the PC chair at tom.schrijvers(a)cs.kuleuven.be. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to: - language concepts - type systems, type checking, type inferencing - compilation techniques - staged compilation - run-time function specialization - run-time code generation - partial evaluation - (abstract) interpretation - metaprogramming - generic programming - automatic program generation - array processing - concurrent/parallel programming - concurrent/parallel program execution - embedded systems - web applications - (embedded) domain specific languages - security - novel memory management techniques - run-time profiling performance measurements - debugging and tracing - virtual/abstract machine architectures - validation, verification of functional programs - tools and programming techniques - (industrial) applications Peter Landin Prize The Peter Landin Prize is awarded to the best paper presented at the symposium every year. The honored article is selected by the program committee based on the submissions received for the formal review process. The prize carries a cash award equivalent to 150 Euros. Programme committee Chair: Tom Schrijvers, KU Leuven, Belgium - Sandrine Blazy, University of Rennes 1, France - Laura Castro, University of A Coruña, Spain - Jacques, Garrigue, Nagoya University, Japan - Clemens Grelck, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands - Zoltan Horvath, Eotvos Lorand University, Hungary - Jan Martin Jansen, Netherlands Defence Academy, The Netherlands - Mauro Jaskelioff, CIFASIS/Universidad Nacional de Rosario, Argentina - Patricia Johann, Appalachian State University, USA - Wolfram Kahl, McMaster University, Canada - Pieter Koopman, Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands - Shin-Cheng Mu, Academia Sinica, Taiwan - Henrik Nilsson, University of Nottingham, UK - Nikolaos Papaspyrou, National Technical University of Athens, Greece - Atze van der Ploeg, Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden - Matija Pretnar, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia - Tillmann Rendel, University of Tübingen, Germany - Christophe Scholliers, Universiteit Gent, Belgium - Sven-Bodo Scholz, Heriot-Watt University, UK - Melinda Toth, Eotvos Lorand University, Hungary - Meng Wang, University of Kent, UK - Jeremy Yallop, University of Cambridge, UK Venue The 28th IFL will be held in association with the Faculty of Computer Science, KU Leuven, Belgium. Leuven is centrally located in Belgium and can be easily reached from Brussels Airport by train (~15 minutes). The venue in the Arenberg Castle park can be reached by foot, bus or taxi from the city center. See the website for more information on the venue.

1 0