Re: [Scheme-reports] [wg2] in support of single-arity procedural syntax transformers

[Alex Shinn <alexshinn@x>]

On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 8:56 PM, Alaric Snell-Pym
<alaric@x> wrote:
> On 05/11/11 12:41, Alex Shinn wrote:
>>
>> Are you actually arguing that MIT Scheme, Chicken,
>> Chibi, riaxpander and others should have to rewrite
>> their entire macro system?  When there's a trivial
>> compromise available?
>>
>
> What trivial compromise do you have in mind, Alex?
>
> Mine is that the exact nature of an expander is
> implementation-dependent, and that's what macros like "syntax-rules" et
> al are for: to map from standard forms into the common one. Might not
> even be a closure, although that is an obvious choice?

Exactly, just provide a wrapper.  As I said in an earlier
mail, use (syntax-object-transformer (lambda (x) ...))
instead of the raw (lambda (x) ...).

This solves all compatibility problems, and loses nothing.
There's no reason not to do it.

-- 
Alex

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@x
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports