[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Trouble creating SRFI-9 Record in C
From: |
paul |
Subject: |
Re: Trouble creating SRFI-9 Record in C |
Date: |
Sun, 12 Sep 2021 09:42:11 +1000 |
Hey Matt,
Yeah that was exactly my workaround 🙂 I was wondering whether i could use the
syntax transformer more "directly" from C, or something like that.
Thanks,
paul
> On 11 Sep 2021, at 23:31, Matt Wette <matt.wette@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> maybe add
>
> (define (make-foo-x a b) (make-foo a b))
>
> then call make-foo-x (or reverse names)
>
>> On 9/10/21 7:27 PM, paul wrote:
>> Good day guile-users,
>>
>> I am having a struggle with SRFI-9 records. They look very convenient, so
>> i'd like to use them in my Guile scripts. However, i'm not sure how to
>> correctly construct them from C-land. I have something like the following:
>>
>> ```
>> (define-record-type <foo>
>> (make-foo a b)
>> foo?
>> (a foo-a)
>> (b foo-b))
>> ```
>>
>> In Guile land, that works great. Now, i want to create a foo in C and pass
>> it to a function in the Guile script. I do something like the following:
>>
>> ```
>> scm_c_primitive_load("foo.scm");
>> scm_call_5(scm_variable_ref(scm_c_lookup("make-foo")),
>> scm_from_utf8_string("blah"),
>> scm_from_int32(Int32(42)))
>> ```
>>
>> However, this results in an error:
>>
>> guile: uncaught exception:
>> Wrong type to apply: #<syntax-transformer make-foo>
>>
>> I've tried with and without (define-module foo) at the top of the file, that
>> doesn't seem to make a difference. I've been able to work around the issue
>> by defining a wrapper (define (foo-prime a b) (make-foo a b)) and using that
>> in C as shown above, but that feels ugly. I'm probably missing something
>> obvious, but trawling the mailing list didn't turn up anything i could
>> understand.
>>
>> Does anyone see what i'm doing wrong, or can i simply not use SRFI-9 records
>> in this way?
>>
>> Thanks, 🙌
>> p.
>>
>
>