[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