hello Zelphir,
i understood my error, all was ok is just that it convert this way:
'{x <+ 2 3}
($nfx$ x <+ 2 3)
in general the prefix notation of {1 <+ 2 3 4 ...} is not (<+ 1 2 3 4 ...)
because (<+ 1 2 3 4 ...) in infix is {1 <+ 2 <+ 3 <+ 4 <+ ...}
it a stupid error of mine
i will drop the error case in macro and let Scheme deal with the error
itself ,he do it fine...
we message like that:
Syntax error:
unknown location: source expression failed to match any pattern in form <+
i find the error because thinking to ellipsis make me thiink to multiple
expressions in my <+ operator,anyway you help me, thank you
<+ is just in this case a define:
scheme@(guile-user)> {x <+ 7}
scheme@(guile-user)> x
7
he must be an unary operator , it does not allow multiple arity, but that
could be an idea like in C or as far as i remember one can writ x=y=7,
anyway in scheme it would be harder because SRFI 105 does not deal with
precedence... well i will do that in the future and such writing as x=y=7
is not often used....
thank you
damien
On Sun, Sep 19, 2021 at 2:34 PM Zelphir Kaltstahl <
zelphirkaltst...@posteo.de> wrote:
> Hi Damien!
>
> I think there might be too few expressions matched in the first case: (_
> var expr). Wouldn't it have to be:
>
> ~~~~
> (_ var expr1 expr2)
> ;; or
> (_ var exprs ...)
> ~~~~
>
> for
>
> ~~~~
> (<+ var expr1 expr2)
> ~~~~
>
> to work, simply because of the number of expressions there?
>
> But then you might need to use ellipsis in the resulting syntax somewhere,
> otherwise you get:
>
> ~~~~
> syntax: missing ellipsis in form (syntax (define var expr))
> ~~~~
>
> I don't know where that would go, but I also do not understand yet the
> goal. I think it is best to always describe, what you want to achieve, when
> you write a macro.
>
> Regards,
> Zelphir
> On 9/4/21 4:41 PM, Damien Mattei wrote:
>
> hi,
>
> i have this macro:
>
> (define-syntax <+
> (syntax-rules ()
> ((_ var expr) (define var expr))
> ((_ err ...) (syntax-error "Bad <- form")) ;; does not work in infix !
> ))
>
> why my syntax-error pattern never reach in infix:
>
> scheme@(guile-user)> {x <+ 7 8}
> While compiling expression:
> Syntax error:
> unknown file:3:3: source expression failed to match any pattern in form <+
>
> but ok in prefix:
>
> scheme@(guile-user)> (<+ x 9 10)
> While compiling expression:
> Syntax error:
> unknown location: <+: Bad <- form in form (<+ x 9 10)
>
> why?
> Regards,
> Damien
>
> --
> repositories: https://notabug.org/ZelphirKaltstahl
>
>
