> In the same way that properties can now be attached as preserved or > not, we could and an option for specifying whether properties are are > propagated/merged or not. If it's useful, we could even allow a > combining function to be associated with with either a property value > or a property key --- although a general combining function wouldn't > work with a preserved property. Any thoughts on those details?
I don't think I want a general combining function in the `syntax-property` procedure. Ideally syntax properties don't know anything about combining and some external macro expansion parameter defines a syntax properties that should be expanded in this special combining way. That way I don't have to think about it - configuring the behavior of how all macros treat a certain syntax property seems like spooky action at a distance to me. I haven't used them enough to know how well that interoperates with other macros though. > (FWIW, as I look back at the documentation, I think it needs > clarification on the point that only properties of the immediate syntax > object for the input and output of a macro are merged. Properties are > not merged on any syntax object within the immediate syntax object.) I strongly agree with this. The `syntax-property` procedure documentation should mention it. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
