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

Re: isn't computation-rules redundant?

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 53 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 53 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, Alex Shinn wrote:

> Since we need to define define-syntax-computation separately in this
> SRFI for portability, why not make it the more readable version?

I'd rather lose that portability element, since it already is quite
portable _anyways_ to define a SYNTAX-COMPUTATIONS (or whatever it ends
up being called) macro that can work just fine in syntax definition
right-hand-sides, even if that is non-standard; that way DEFINE-SYNTAX
does not lose its universal status as the introducer of derived syntax
and only a little bit of portability is lost.  I really don't think the
extremely minor element of brevity here makes any difference at all.