Thanks And actually I wrote an experimental syntax-parse branch that has support for pattern-expanders. It’s not completely working yet though.
On Jul 20, 2014, at 6:22 PM, J. Ian Johnson <i...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: > If you don't want to allow ellipses, this will work: > (~seq-no-order _pats ...) == (~seq (~or (~once _pats) ...)) > > Here _pats and ... are meta, not part of the syntax-parse syntax. > > If you do want ellipses, then you'll have to do some parsing yourself to > determine which patterns shouldn't be wrapped in ~once. However, you have to > use someone's experimental syntax-parse branch that has support for "pattern > expanders." > -Ian > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Alexander D. Knauth" <alexan...@knauth.org> > To: "racket users list" <users@racket-lang.org> > Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2014 5:23:42 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern > Subject: [racket] Is there anything like a "~seq-no-order" pattern for > syntax/parse ? > > Is there anything like a "~seq-no-order" pattern for syntax/parse ? > > ____________________ > Racket Users list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
