[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Updated SRFI-110 posted.



On Tue, 6 Aug 2013 10:46:11 -0400, John Cowan <cowan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Below is a version with no Java cruft, which I find more readable.

For a *recognizer* the {...} action rules aren't needed, so removing them
for that purpose makes complete sense.  Thanks!

However, we also need to state what the rules *transform* an expression into.
So just like SRFI-49, I intend to express them as transforms in the formal grammar
in the final spec.

I will say I really like having the tutorial in the front of the SRFI.
One side-effect is that we can focus on rigor in the spec, since we no longer
need to also explain its purpose.  I suspect some other SRFIs might benefit
from a short tutorial near their front.

--- David A. Wheeler