unbound identifiers should raise &undefined condition

[leppie]

As per summary.

[Abdulaziz Ghuloum (aghuloum)]

Do you mean the top-level ones?

[leppie (leppie)]

I mean just trying to use some unbound identifier raises &syntax (via stx-error). Like:

some-undefined/unbound-id

This seems to be raised as (stx-error id "unbound identifier"). Most notably in the syntax-type procedure.

According to the spec, &undefined condition should be used for unbound identifiers.

More info: I am just setting up a little test library. Example:

(test 'hello => 'hello)
(test hello &> &syntax) ; should be &undefined
(test (hello) &> &syntax) ; should be &undefined
(test (car '1) &> &assertion)
(test (car) &> &syntax)

To test expected exceptions/behaviour/etc.

[Abdulaziz Ghuloum (aghuloum)]

Okay. Done in revision 1284. Do you think the condition should have both &syntax and &undefined, or only &undefined?

Unhandled exception:
 Condition components:
   1. &who: dfkjhdksjfh
   2. &message: "unbound identifier"
   3. &undefined
   4. &source-information:
       file-name: "/tmp/foo.ss"
       character: 20

[Derick Eddington (derick-eddington)]

On Mon, 2007-12-24 at 00:54 +0000, Abdulaziz Ghuloum wrote:
> Okay. Done in revision 1284. Do you think the condition should have
> both &syntax and &undefined, or only &undefined?

My two cents is that it should only have &undefined, because the report
says &syntax "describes syntax violations" which implies the syntax
keyword is bound but was used incorrectly, whereas &undefined "describes
unbound identifiers in the program".

[leppie (leppie)]

I agree with Derick, but I am not sure that &who should imply '&what', so a &syntax for the form would be handy.

[Abdulaziz Ghuloum (aghuloum)]

This bug report is about to be closed as the fix comitted
previously will be incorporated in the next 0.0.3 release of
Ikarus Scheme, scheduled for January 31, 2008. A release
candidate tarball is available for download from:
http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~aghuloum/ikarus/ikarus-0.0.3-rc1.tar.gz
Please do test it if you have the time and report any issues
you might encounter. Thank you very much for your support.
(Sorry for the duplicates; I'm updating every open bug.)