Thanks for the bug report, and for the detailed analysis. I will try to look
at and fix this soon.
Regards,
Malcolm
On 10 Jan 2016, at 20:09, Alain O'Dea wrote:
> Got a clear answer about the handling of if defined.
>
> Expanding macros within if defined is non-compliant if cpphs is trying to be
> a C99 preprocessor:
> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1256.pdf
> 6.10.1/1 Conditional Inclusion pg 148 indicates that the token after defined
> or within defined ( ) is an identifier, not a macro to be expanded.
>
> I'm not sure what's involved in fixing this behavior in cpphs, but I'm happy
> to test fixes.
>
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 3:53 PM Alain O'Dea <alain.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've isolated the issue to the handling of if defined on multi-argument
> macros.
>
> I took a crack at interpreting the cpphs source for this and I think it may
> be a bug in the conversion of defined expressions here in
> Language.Preprocessor.CppIfdef here:
>
> convert "defined" [arg] =
> case lookupST arg st of
> Nothing | all isDigit arg -> return arg
> Nothing -> return "0"
> Just (a@AntiDefined{}) -> return "0"
> Just (a@SymbolReplacement{}) -> return "1"
> Just (a@MacroExpansion{}) -> return "1"
>
> It looks like it will macro expand the contents of a defined expression which
> isn't what GCC does. I don't know if GCC is wrong or if using parameterized
> macros within
>
> if defined works on single-argument macros.
>
> working1.hs:
>
> {-# LANGUAGE CPP #-}
>
> #define EXAMPLE_MACRO(arg) (\
> arg)
>
> #if defined(EXAMPLE_MACRO)
> #endif
>
> preprocess it (it works!):
>
> $ cpphs --cpp working1.hs -o $tempfile
> $
>
> ifdef works on multiple-argument macros.
>
> working2.hs:
>
> {-# LANGUAGE CPP #-}
>
> #define EXAMPLE_MACRO(arg1,arg2) (\
> arg1 > arg2)
>
> #ifdef EXAMPLE_MACRO
> #endif
>
> preprocess it (it works!):
>
> $ cpphs --cpp working2.hs -o $tempfile
> $
>
> if defined fails on multi-argument macros.
>
> broken2.hs:
>
> {-# LANGUAGE CPP #-}
>
> #define EXAMPLE_MACRO(arg1,arg2) (\
> arg1 > arg2)
>
> #if defined(EXAMPLE_MACRO)
> #endif
>
> preprocess it (it fails!):
>
> $ cpphs --cpp broken2.hs -o $tempfile
> cpphs: macro EXAMPLE_MACRO expected 2 arguments, but was given 0
> $
>
> I've posted a StackOverflow question to see if any of them know if this is
> undefined behavior:
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/34709769/is-cpphs-wrong-or-is-the-behavior-of-macros-with-arguments-in-if-defined-express
>
> If it is undefined behavior we should stop relying on it in GHC sources.
> Either way the behavior is inconsistent with GCC which complicates things.
>
> Best,
> Alain
>
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 2:04 PM Alain O'Dea <alain.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Malcolm:
>
> cpphs is under consideration as a replacement for GCC's C preprocessor in the
> GHC toolchain:
> https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Proposal/NativeCpp
>
> GHC 7.10.3's build fails when cpphs is used as the C preprocessor
> (--with-hs-cpp=cpphs --with-hs-cpp-flags="--cpp").
>
> It runs into this error when preprocessing libraries/base/GHC/Natural.hs:
>
> cpphs: macro MIN_VERSION_integer_gmp expected 3 arguments, but was given 0
>
> I've reproduced this issue on Ubuntu 14.04 x86-64 and SmartOS 15.3.0 x86-64.
>
> Interestingly the error seems to arise only when preprocessing Natural.hs
> while the autogenerated cabal-macros.h is present. Removing that include
> from the cpphs flags leads to a clean preprocessing run.
>
> I have more details of this investigation here:
> https://gist.github.com/AlainODea/bd5b3e0e6f7c4227f009
>
> Is this a bug?
>
> Best,
> Alain
_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
