I have some function with loop, each iteration it reads input, on "0" it calls function "exit-and-save", in that function it saves some database and after that I need it to exit the program? What is the command for that? If I use return-from... it just returns from function, if I use return - error, if I use quit, it disconnects from slime. I'm new in common lisp...
(loop for i from 0 to 10
do (progn (format t "~&cycle ~d" i)
(when (> i 5)
(return nil))))
First of all I cannot verify that slime disconnects using (quit), at least not using sbcl at Ubuntu.
CL-USER> (quit)
; Evaluation aborted on NIL.
CL-USER>
"still able to input here"
But if you got some freakish version of slime you could take advantage of the condition system:
(define-condition end-program-condition (simple-error) ())
(defun some-func ()
(error 'end-program-condition))
(defun main-function ()
(handler-case (some-func)
(end-program-condition () "THE END")))
CL-USER> (main-function)
"THE END"
CL-USER> "still can input here"
"still can input here"
It depends on your common lisp implementation, but if using sbcl for example, you could call sb-ext:exit.
Source: http://www.sbcl.org/manual/#Exit
Related
So consider the following code:
(define-condition some-condition (error) nil)
(defmethod print-object ((obj some-condition) stream)
(format stream "HELLO THERE"))
(defmacro error-report-test-aux (fn-to-cause-error error-type-to-catch fn-to-handle-error expected-message)
`(let ((result-message
(handler-case (funcall ,fn-to-cause-error)
(,error-type-to-catch (e) (funcall ,fn-to-handle-error e)))))
(assert (string= result-message
,expected-message))
t))
I can use it like so:
(error-report-test-aux (lambda () (error 'some-condition))
some-condition
#'princ-to-string
"HELLO THERE")
But I wanted to make error-report-test-aux a function instead of macro, so that i can pass to it a type of condition within a variable.
To simply write defun instead of defmacro and remove backquote and commas doesn't work because handler-case is macro and it doesn't evaluate error-type-to-catch.
My question is: Is there something like handler-case that would evaluate it's arguments (specifically condition type argument)?
Yes and no :-)
No to your exact question
There is no standard function that would do what you want because catching errors requires establishing bindings and one usually want to bind constant symbols (like in let/let*) because it is easier to optimize.
You might consider creating a "universal" handler using handler-bind and then declining to handle "uninteresting" conditions (as suggested by #jkiiski in comments), but I am not sure if that fits your exact requirements (untested!):
(defun error-report-test-aux (fn-to-cause-error error-type-to-catch expected-message)
(catch 'trap
(handler-bind ((error
(lambda (condition)
(when (typep condition error-type-to-catch)
(throw 'trap (string= (princ-to-string condition)
expected-message))))))
(funcall fn-to-cause-error))))
Yes, implementation-specific
IF your implementation implements handler-case/handler-bind by binding an internal global variable, you can use progv to bind it yourself and thus implement your error-report-test-aux as a function.
This is probably not the best idea (your code becomes wedded to a specific implementation).
Yes, kinda
You can use the fact that some-condition names a CLOS class and use generic functions instead of the macro.
I thought I would be able to find this through Google, SO, or the books I'm reading, but it is proving elusive.
In the implementation I'm learning with, I can do the following at the top-level:
(defvar *foo* 4)
(set 'bar 3)
If I then call (describe '*foo*) and (describe 'bar), I get a description saying that *foo* is special and bar is non-special (among other details).
Is there a function that takes a symbol variable as an argument and returns true or false if it is special? If so, is describe probably implemented in part by calling it?
Context: I'm learning Common Lisp, but at work I have a system with a dialect of Lisp similar to Common Lisp, but the describe function is unimplemented. There's sort of an XY thing going on here, but I'm also trying to grok Lisp and CL.
Many Common Lisp implementations provide the function variable-information in some system dependent package.
Here in SBCL:
* (require :sb-cltl2)
NIL
* (sb-cltl2:variable-information '*standard-output*)
:SPECIAL
NIL
((TYPE . STREAM))
This function was proposed as part of some other functionality to be included into ANSI CL, but didn't make it into the standard. Still many implementations have it. For documentation see: https://www.cs.cmu.edu/Groups/AI/html/cltl/clm/node102.html
A non-special variable's environment will be captured when you create a closure over it:
(let ((x 1))
(let ((f (lambda () x)))
(let ((x 2))
(eql 2 (funcall f)))))
;;=> NIL
A special variable's lexical environment will not:
(defvar *x*) ; *x* is special
(let ((*x* 1))
(let ((f (lambda () *x*)))
(let ((*x* 2))
(eql 2 (funcall f)))))
;;=> T
Using this approach, you could easily define a macro that will expand to code like the previous that will let you determine whether a symbol is globally proclaimed special:
(defmacro specialp (symbol)
(let ((f (gensym "FUNC-")))
`(let ((,symbol 1))
(let ((,f (lambda () ,symbol)))
(let ((,symbol 2))
(eql 2 (funcall ,f)))))))
(specialp x) ;=> NIL
(specialp *x*) ;=> T
Note that this isn't a function, it's a macro. That means that the macro function for specialp is getting called with the symbols X and *X*. This is important, because we have to construct code that uses these symbols. You can't do this with a function, because there'd be no (portable) way to take a symbol and create a lexical environment that has a lexical variable with that name and a lambda function that refers to it.
This also has some risks if you try to use it with certain symbols. For instance, in SBCL, if you try to bind, e.g., *standard-output* to something that isn't a stream or a stream designator, you'll get an error:
CL-USER> (specialp *standard-output*)
; in: SPECIALP *STANDARD-OUTPUT*
; (LET ((*STANDARD-OUTPUT* 1))
; (LET ((#:FUNC-1038 (LAMBDA # *STANDARD-OUTPUT*)))
; (LET ((*STANDARD-OUTPUT* 2))
; (EQL 2 (FUNCALL #:FUNC-1038)))))
;
; caught WARNING:
; Constant 1 conflicts with its asserted type STREAM.
; See also:
; The SBCL Manual, Node "Handling of Types"
;
; compilation unit finished
; caught 1 WARNING condition
Defining globals with set or setq is not supported. There are 2 common ways to define globals:
(defparameter *par* 20) ; notice the earmuffs in the name!
(defvar *var* 30) ; notice the earmuffs in the name!
All global variables are special. Lexically scoped variables (not special) are not possible to get described. E.g.
(let ((x 10))
(describe 'x)) ; ==> X is the symbol X
It describes not the lexical variable but the symbol representation. It really doesn't matter since you probably never need to know in run time since you know this when you're writing if it's a bound lexical variable or global special by conforming to the earmuffs naming convention for global variables.
I believe the only way to get this information at run time* is by either using an extension to CL, as Rainer noted, or to use eval.
(defun specialp (x)
(or (boundp x)
(eval `(let (,x)
(declare (ignorable ,x))
(boundp ',x)))))
(Defect warning: If the variable is unbound but declared to be a type incompatible with nil, this could raise an error. Thanks Joshua for pointing it out in his answer.)
* The macro approach determines which symbol it is checking at macro expansion time, and whether that symbol is lexical or special at compile time. That's fine for checking the status of a variable at the repl. If you wanted to e.g. print all of the special variables exported by a package, though, you would find that to use the macro version you would end up having to use eval at the call site:
(loop for s being the external-symbols of :cl-ppcre
when (eval `(specialp-macro ,s)) do (print s))
I'm trying to make a prompt for user input, but each time i call this function, instead of printing the ":", it waits until I press something and after that prints the character ":".
I can't find anything on the web.
(defun MovimientoAdversario ()
(let ((aux))
(format t "~% :")
(setf aux (read))))
Try flushing the output buffers before reading:
(format t "~% :")
(force-output)
(setf aux (read))
I am calling my common-lisp program via a shellscript which calls sbcl with the necessary parameters and I have to guarantee that anyhow the actual program finishes the call will end clean with some/none output.
My current solution looks like this:
sbcl --eval "(unwind-protect
(handler-case
(progn
(declaim #+sbcl(sb-ext:muffle-conditions style-warning))
(let ((*standard-output* (make-broadcast-stream)))
(ql:quickload \"module\"))
(eval (read-from-string \"(package:start)\"))) ;this starts the program
(error (err)
(FORMAT t \"Something went really wrong:~a~%\" err)
(sb-ext:exit)))
(sb-ext:exit))"
But in the following two szenarios it wont work:
sbcl --eval "(unwind-protect
(handler-case
(progn
(define-condition bad () ())
(error 'bad))
(error (err)
(FORMAT t \"Something went really wrong:~a~%\" err)
(sb-ext:exit)))
(sb-ext:exit))"
sbcl --eval "(unwind-protect
(handler-case
(progn
(labels ((rek () (rek)))
(rek)))
(error (err)
(FORMAT t \"Something went really wrong:~a~%\" err)
(sb-ext:exit)))
(sb-ext:exit))"
I am now wondering if there is another solution which will catch ANY possible outcome of a called program and will ensure that the sbcl call will exit clean?
For the first scenario a general catch which does not specify what to catch, would probably do the deal. The second scenario has to be able to cope with bugs/errors which would result in the low-level-debuger being called.
The --non-interactive switch will ensure that SBCL never enters the debugger or the REPL. It's similar to passing --disable-debugger and using --eval "(sb-ext:quit)". You can also customize sb-ext:*invoke-debugger-hook* if you don't want it to print a backtrace in the event of an error.
It seems there is NO ANSI standard way to execute an external program and get its output as the following SBCL special code does:
(defmacro with-input-from-program ((stream program program-args environment)
&body body)
"Creates an new process of the specified by PROGRAM using
PROGRAM-ARGS as a list of the arguments to the program. Binds the
stream variable to an input stream from which the output of the
process can be read and executes body as an implicit progn."
#+sbcl
(let ((process (gensym)))
`(let ((,process (sb-ext::run-program ,program
,program-args
:output :stream
:environment ,environment
:wait nil)))
(when ,process
(unwind-protect
(let ((,stream (sb-ext:process-output ,process)))
,#body)
(sb-ext:process-wait ,process)
(sb-ext:process-close ,process))))))
The following CCL code reports "ERROR: value # is not of the expected type (AND CCL::BINARY-STREAM INPUT-STREAM)"
#+clozure
(let ((process (gensym)))
`(let ((,process (ccl:run-program "/bin/sh" (list "-c" (namestring ,program))
:input nil :output :stream :error :stream
:wait nil)))
(when ,process
(unwind-protect
(let ((,stream (ccl::external-process-output-stream ,process)))
,#body)
;(ccl:process-wait (ccl:process-whostate ,process) nil)
(close (ccl::external-process-output-stream ,process))
(close (ccl::external-process-error-stream ,process))))))
I know little CCL. I want to know how i can modify this code to support CCL ?
Any suggestion is appreciated !
Apparently trivial-shell:shell-command doesn't allow exactly what you want (it executes the external command synchronously and returns the whole output).
You could look into CCL's run-program. See:
run-program;
Does there exist standard way to run external program in Common Lisp? (this is a question that is similar to your question);
external-program (suggested in one of the answers in the question above) is supported by Quicklisp and it seems to have better support for executing external programs.
You should use trivial-shell.
Trivial shell is a simple platform independent interface to the underlying Operating System.