I have already done that in the example, the issue is testing the
syntax it produces when called at phase 0.
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 5:04 AM, Robby Findler
wrote:
> You can put your helper code in a submodule that you require from the test
> module at phase 0 but from the actual module at phase 1.
You can put your helper code in a submodule that you require from the test
module at phase 0 but from the actual module at phase 1.
Robby
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 1:47 AM, Eric Dobson wrote:
> The issue with that is that it runs the code (compute) at phase1, when
> I need to run that code at pha
The issue with that is that it runs the code (compute) at phase1, when
I need to run that code at phase 0, otherwise compiling the module
runs the tests. I'm willing to muck with eval and namespaces, so I
believe what I want should be possible if difficult.
On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 11:34 PM, Ryan C
On 04/07/2013 01:24 AM, Eric Dobson wrote:
I am trying to test a helper to a macro. It generates a syntax object
with bindings at phase-1, this is then returned by the macro and it
correctly evaluates. Is there a way to not go through the macro, but
still evaluate the syntax-object with those bin
I am trying to test a helper to a macro. It generates a syntax object
with bindings at phase-1, this is then returned by the macro and it
correctly evaluates. Is there a way to not go through the macro, but
still evaluate the syntax-object with those bindings it has at phase-1
relative to the helpe
5 matches
Mail list logo
