Re: Confusing error messages from guix when loading a user scheme file that fails to load another file

[zimoun]

Hi,

On Sun, 21 Feb 2021 at 10:46, Rovanion Luckey <rovanion.luckey@gmail.com> wrote:

> 1. Why is the file and line number not reported when the user provided scheme 
> file fails to load another file?

Because Guile does not provide this information.

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
$ guile -s /tmp/load-non-existing-file.scm
Backtrace:
In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
  1736:10  7 (with-exception-handler _ _ #:unwind? _ # _)
In unknown file:
           6 (apply-smob/0 #<thunk 7f42cf279540>)
In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
    718:2  5 (call-with-prompt ("prompt") #<procedure 7f42cf28b980 …> …)
In ice-9/eval.scm:
    619:8  4 (_ #(#(#<directory (guile-user) 7f42ceeb3f00>)))
In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
   2806:4  3 (save-module-excursion #<procedure 7f42ceea6180 at ice-…>)
  4351:12  2 (_)
In ice-9/ports.scm:
   440:11  1 (call-with-input-file "non-existant" #<procedure 7f42c…> …)
In unknown file:
           0 (open-file "non-existant" "r" #:encoding #f # #f)

ERROR: In procedure open-file:
In procedure open-file: No such file or directory: "non-existant"
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---


> 2. Is it possible to modify guix so that it is?

>From my understanding, no.  Well, it is not easy, but I could  be wrong.

> 3. If not, is the code path that I patched also used for other failures 
> making the modification I demonstrated above a bad idea?

Instead of modifying the "generic" message, it seems more appropriate
to collect the error, i.e., add another case for the match.


All the best,
simon