Hello, Thanks for the review.
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> wrote: > Some first thoughts on the CPS language, just after having looked at > (language cps): > > * Overall looking really good. > Thanks! You may choose to retract that after you see the other files, of course. :-) > * License blocks are missing. > > * Toplevel comments should be prefixed by ";;; " (three semicolons). > > * Overview could go in the module commentary section. > These three should be simple to fix. > * Missing distinction between original names and unique names. > Yes, I agree. I think it even reuses original names sometimes, which is not good. I should just rename everything. > * Missing source information. > The issue here is not that it's hard to pass source information through to the compiler, but that I haven't figured out what to do with it when I have it. I imagine that your ELF work has solved this problem. > * Missing procedure properties. > Can you explain what you mean? Does the compiler need to handle procedure properties specially? > * Why is there no "let" that can bind functions? You don't always want > to set up a recursive binding environment. > > * Lambdas are missing lambda* and case-lambda support. > With these two, it's just that I haven't implemented it yet. I'll try to do it quickly, although I don't know how much time I'll have to work on it. > What do you think about rebasing? wip-rtl-may-2013 is a good target > until wip-rtl goes into master. > Sounds great! I think the compiler stuff is fairly separate from the RTL stuff - when I've rebased it occasionally, it hasn't been a problem. Best, Noah
