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

Re: [Scheme-reports] auxiliary syntax

10 minutes ago, Alex Shinn wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 12:09 AM, Eli Barzilay <eli@x> wrote:
>     > The solution some suggest is just to using renaming. [...] I could
>     > try to prefix the SRE identifiers consistently, e.g. `rx:' and
>     > `rx?', except oops, the underlying SRE engine doesn't know these
>     > names!
>     If it's hygienic -- ie, if it's comparing identifiers, then it would
>     work fine.  No impasse.
> The underlying engine is irregex.  It _can't_ be hygienic even if
> I wanted it to - it's not a macro language.

(At least in the context of Scheme, the above doesn't make any sense.)

> It shouldn't be a macro language either, otherwise you couldn't
> dynamically generate SREs which would really suck.

Um, how is generating things dynamically a problem?  (I'd expect it to
be the usual case -- code that generates SREs in functions, or if you
want to abstract at the program generation level then you write a

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

Scheme-reports mailing list