Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> writes:
> Hi Tomas,
>
> Tomas Volf <~@wolfsden.cz> skribis:
>
>> +(define-syntax define-equality-test
>> (syntax-rules ()
>> ((_ name test-proc)
>> (define-syntax name
>> (λ (x)
>> (syntax-case x ()
>> ((_ test-name expected test-expr)
>> - #`(%%test-2 #,x test-proc test-name expected test-expr))
>> + #`(%test-2 #,x test-proc test-name expected test-expr))
>> ((_ expected test-expr)
>> - #`(%%test-2 #,x test-proc #f expected test-expr))))))))
>> + #`(%test-2 #,x test-proc #f expected test-expr))))))))
>> +(set-documentation! 'define-equality-test
>> + "@defspec define-equality-test identifier proc
>> +Define a new test form named @var{identifier} with same signature and usage
>> as
>> +@code{test-eq} but using @var{proc} instead of @code{eq?}.
>
> I didn’t notice earlier, but you can add docstrings like this:
>
> (define-syntax define-equality-test
> (syntax-rules ()
> "This is the docstring."
> …))Ah, good catch. Since that works just for syntax-rules and not syntax-case, I probably did not moved the documentation string around when switching between them. Will update. > > As for exporting ‘define-equality-test’, I would clearly mark it as a > “GNU extension”. > > The way this was done before is by having more exports in a separate > module, like (srfi srfi-9 gnu). > > Whether or not you pick this approach, please make sure to document it > in the manual and to prominently mark it as a GNU extension. I personally think that leaving it in one module is fine, and I agree it should be documented. There are other GNU extensions already in the new SRFI-64, and I plan to document all once #71300 is merged. I will wait for v2 until that happens and will include the documentation changes required. Have a nice day, Tomas -- There are only two hard things in Computer Science: cache invalidation, naming things and off-by-one errors.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
