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

Fwd: reference implementation; multiple patterns after ellipsis

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 46 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 46 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

Begin forwarded message:

From: Alvationsay Petrofsky <alvationsay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue Oct 21, 2003  10:18:20 US/Eastern
To: campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: reference implementation; multiple patterns after ellipsis

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 02:36:53 -0400
From: Taylor Campbell <campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

Did you mean to respond only to me and not the list?

Eek.  That would require that I somehow comprehend psyntax.  If
Scott and Felix can only _barely_ comprehend it, I have grave doubts
about _me_ comprehending it...(but I suppose I can try to, and maybe
try to comprehend yours as well, although the more I think about it
the more I dislike the idea of writing a macro transformer purely for
SYNTAX-RULES and _directly_ for SYNTAX-RULES; Scheme48's macro
expander, for instance, totals fewer than one thousand lines of code,
_including_ comments, and it's a SYNTAX-RULES->explicit renaming
transformer _as_well_as_ a macro expander for explicit renaming;
unfortunately, the explicit renaming bit uses Scheme48's internal AST
stuff, so it's not portable at all)

If you like scheme48's implementation, then you should extend it to
support SRFI-46.  Then we'll have two independent implementations,
which is much better than one, even if neither is of practical use
with most scheme systems.

I guess I could put a link to your expander in the implementation
section.  Would that be OK?

No, a copy of the reference implementation (whatever it is) should be
stored with the SRFI.