On Thursday 18 May 2006 17:46, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> Erik Sandberg schreef:
> > On 5/18/06, Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> 1. because the parser also determines which ones are called.
> >
> > how? According to my plan, the functions do that themselves (by being
> > either
Erik Sandberg schreef:
On 5/18/06, Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Erik Sandberg schreef:
> If we use a separate module for syntax expressions, why not just say
foo?
> e.g.:
> (sequential-music .. )
> for a syntax expression that represents (and, incidentally, produces
music
>
On 5/18/06, Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Erik Sandberg schreef:
> If we use a separate module for syntax expressions, why not just say foo?
> e.g.:
> (sequential-music .. )
> for a syntax expression that represents (and, incidentally, produces music
> which represents) sequentia
Erik Sandberg schreef:
I realised that there's a thinko in this naming convention:
(make-syntax-foo ...) _is_ a syntax expression, and it _makes_ a music
expression.
yes.
If we use a separate module for syntax expressions, why not just say foo?
e.g.:
(sequential-music .. )
for a syntax e
On Wednesday 17 May 2006 19:28, Erik Sandberg wrote:
> On Wednesday 17 May 2006 17:31, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> > Erik Sandberg schreef:
> > > The next step in parser split-up is to move rules out to Scheme. There
> > > will be a lot of functions, so I suggest we create a new make-music.scm
> > >
Erik Sandberg wrote:
The next step in parser split-up is to move rules out to Scheme. There
will be a lot of functions, so I suggest we create a new make-music.scm
for this.
Regarding naming, we already have a make-foo-music for plain SCM use.
I suppose however that it would be useful for sche
On Wednesday 17 May 2006 17:31, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> Erik Sandberg schreef:
> > The next step in parser split-up is to move rules out to Scheme. There
> > will be a lot of functions, so I suggest we create a new make-music.scm
> > for this.
>
> Regarding naming, we already have a make-foo-musi
Erik Sandberg schreef:
Hi,
The attahed patch changes all Music* types in the parser to SCM. I think I
fixed some memory leaks also.
yes, this is good.
The next step in parser split-up is to move rules out to Scheme. There will be
a lot of functions, so I suggest we create a new make-music.s
Hi,
The attahed patch changes all Music* types in the parser to SCM. I think I
fixed some memory leaks also.
The next step in parser split-up is to move rules out to Scheme. There will be
a lot of functions, so I suggest we create a new make-music.scm for this.
We will need a mechanism for han
