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

Re: Alternative formulations of keywords

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 88 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 88 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

On Apr 11, John Cowan wrote:
> Per Bothner scripsit:
> > As long as one can handle computed keywords using (apply ...) or
> > some similar higher-order function, then I really don't care about
> > computed keyword support in the "sugared syntax".
> I don't see the use case for computed keywords even in APPLY.  I do
> see the use case for passing *arguments* designated by keywords
> using APPLY.

(I'll be using the syntax from our library, no time to read Marc's
syntax, sorry.)

(define (assoc x l #!key test)
  ... assoc using `test' to find an item ...)

;; searches for an x association in foo's table, same keywords as `assoc'
(define (search x foo . r)
  (apply assoc x (foo-table foo) r))

          ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
                  http://www.barzilay.org/                 Maze is Life!