On Sat 03 Sep 2011 22:25, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Andy Wingo skribis:
>
>> @deffn {Syntax} define-syntax-rule (keyword . pattern) [docstring]
>> template
>> Define @var{keyword} as a new @code{syntax-rules} macro with one clause.
>> @end deffn
>
> Do other implementa
Hi Andy!
Andy Wingo skribis:
> @deffn {Syntax} define-syntax-rule (keyword . pattern) [docstring]
> template
> Define @var{keyword} as a new @code{syntax-rules} macro with one clause.
> @end deffn
Do other implementations have this macro?
Thanks,
Ludo’.
"Andy Wingo" wrote:
> Probably not a good assumption to make on this list :)
The message from the OP started with:
> From R6RS Section 10:
>
> define-syntax form The expander expands and evaluates the
>right-hand-side expression and binds the keyword to the resulting
>transformer.
--
M
On Wed 16 Jun 2010 09:35, Marco Maggi writes:
> "Ludovic Courtès" wrote:
>> (define-syntax +
>>(let ((plus +))
>
> I am assuming you are starting the program with:
>
> (import (rnrs))
Probably not a good assumption to make on this list :)
Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/
"Ludovic Courtès" wrote:
> (define-syntax +
>(let ((plus +))
I am assuming you are starting the program with:
(import (rnrs))
or you are importing at level 1 a library which exports "+";
if this is the case, and you want R6RS compatibility, IMHO
this should fail because you are redefinin
Hey!
Andy Wingo writes:
> Indeed + does resolve to whatever + was bound to before the definition;
> it's just that when you define the + macro it usually defines at
> compile-time too! By compiling ahead of time and exiting we leave + in
> its pristine state. See also the discussion of
> eval-sy
Hi,
On Tue 15 Jun 2010 22:48, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> From R6RS Section 10:
>
> define-syntax form The expander expands and evaluates the
> right-hand-side expression and binds the keyword to the resulting
> transformer.
>
> Thus I think the following should work:
>
A
2008/12/9 Pach Roman (DGS-EC/ESG3) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> take look at the results
>
> (1) dummy => (lambda () (string-concatenate (list "a" "b" "c")))
> (2) dummy => (lambda () "abc")
>
> in the case of define-syntax (1) the string "abc" will be computed at
> the run time,
> the macro version (2
2008/12/9 Pach Roman (DGS-EC/ESG3) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I've performed following two short tests.
>
> test 1:
> ---
>
> (use-syntax (ice-9 syncase))
>
> (define-syntax my-macro-1
> (syntax-rules ()
> ((_ par1 par2 par3)
> (begin
>(string-concatenate (list par1 par2 par3
