Hello,
I was playing around with the ECMAScript implementation in 2.0.5, and found
a bug when calling anonymous functions:
ecmascript@(guile-user)> var foo = (function(x) { return x+1; })(1);
$5 = 2
ecmascript@(guile-user)> foo;
;;; <unknown-location>: warning: possibly unbound variable `foo'
ERROR: In procedure #<procedure 8f4c140 ()>:
ERROR: In procedure module-lookup: Unbound variable: foo
If you take a look at the compiled code:
0 (assert-nargs-ee/locals 0) ;; 0 args, 0 locals
2 (new-frame)
3 (toplevel-ref 7)
5 (mv-call 0 :L1233) ;; MV -> 15
10 (drop)
11 (br :L1234) ;; -> 18
15 (truncate-values 0 0)
18 (make-int8 2) ;; 2
20 (return)
21 (object-ref 8)
23 (define)
24 (void)
25 (return)
I think it is the first (return) that causes the variable `foo' to not be
defined. I did a bit of hacking and found out the problem occurs during the
tree-il optimization step: Here's the tree-il code before optimization:
(lambda () (lambda-case ((() #f #f #f () ()) (seq (call (@ (language
ecmascript impl) js-init)) (seq (define foo (call (lambda () (lambda-case
((() (x) #f #f ((@ (language ecmascript impl) *undefined*)) (#{x 875}#))
(let () () () (primcall return (primcall #{1+}# (lexical x #{x 875}#)))))))
(const 1))) (void))))))
And the tree-il after:
(lambda () (lambda-case ((() #f #f #f () ()) (seq (call (@ (language
ecmascript impl) js-init)) (seq (define foo (primcall return (const 2)))
(void))))))
Regards,
Steve
