Joo ChurlSoo <init...@gmail.com> writes:
> The following behavior of `let' seems to be wrong.
>
> guile> (version)
> "1.8.8"
> guile>
> (let ((go #f)
> (alist '()))
> (let ((a 1) (b (call-with-current-continuation (lambda (x) (set! go x) 2))))
> (set! alist (cons (cons a b) alist))
> (set! a 100)
> (set! alist (cons (cons a b) alist))
> (if (< (length alist) 3)
> (go 2)
> (reverse alist))))
> ((1 . 2) (100 . 2) (100 . 2) (100 . 2))
> guile>;; inconsistency between let and lambda
> (let ((go #f)
> (alist '()))
> ((lambda (a b)
> (set! alist (cons (cons a b) alist))
> (set! a 100)
> (set! alist (cons (cons a b) alist))
> (if (< (length alist) 3)
> (go 2)
> (reverse alist)))
> 1 (call-with-current-continuation (lambda (x) (set! go x) 2))))
> ((1 . 2) (100 . 2) (1 . 2) (100 . 2))
> guile>
For what it's worth, my current Guile, from Git post 1.9.14, gives ((1
. 2) (100 . 2) (1 . 2) (100 . 2)) for both cases.
Neil
