On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 21:42:14 -0600, Ryan Culpepper wrote: > > On 11/16/2016 07:51 PM, Vincent St-Amour wrote: > > FWIW, Eric Dobson wrote a very nice `define-literal-syntax-class` macro > > that is used extensively inside TR. > > > > > > https://github.com/racket/typed-racket/blob/master/typed-racket-lib/typed-racket/utils/literal-syntax-class.rkt > > > > Its companion `define-merged-syntax-class` is quite nice too. > > > > > > https://github.com/racket/typed-racket/blob/master/typed-racket-lib/typed-racket/optimizer/utils.rkt#L110 > > > > I've used those in other projects as well, and like them a lot. > > > > Ryan: Would you consider adding them (or something like them) to > > syntax/parse? > > I could add a `#:define-syntax-class name` option to > `define-literal-set` that would additionally define `name` as a > syntax-class matching any of the literals. I would want to wait to add > that until I implement the backtracking-aware handling of > disappeared-uses, which I just haven't gotten to yet.
Sure, that works. > For `define-merged-syntax-class`, I don't think I would put it in core > syntax/parse, but maybe as a library in syntax/parse/lib/*. Yeah, that one is just a nice-to-have. It's pretty easy to express using the existing syntax-parse API. Vincent -- 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.
