Sorry-- this was already unchangable 5 years ago, nevermind today.
Robby
On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Jon Rafkind wrote:
> Just in case it was unclear I was hoping people would explicitly adorn
> pattern variables if they want to match the same term.
>
> (simple integer_1 integer_1)
>
> But
Just in case it was unclear I was hoping people would explicitly adorn pattern
variables if they want to match the same term.
(simple integer_1 integer_1)
But if (simple integer integer) to match the same term twice is a heavily used
form then so be it..
On 05/01/2012 05:52 PM, Robby Findler w
This is heavily relied on.
Robby
On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Jon Rafkind wrote:
> The default matching behavior of patterns in redex will try to match
> duplicate pattern variables to the same term. Thus
>
> #lang racket
>
> (require redex)
>
> (define-language Z [x integer])
> (define-meta
Ok after 2 minutes more of thought I guess the response will most likely be
"which integer will you be referencing in the result of the metafunction" -- so
maybe it can be an error to use an unadorned pattern variable twice in a
pattern?
On 05/01/2012 05:45 PM, Jon Rafkind wrote:
> The default
The default matching behavior of patterns in redex will try to match duplicate
pattern variables to the same term. Thus
#lang racket
(require redex)
(define-language Z [x integer])
(define-metafunction Z
simple : integer integer -> integer
[(simple integer integer) 1])
(term (simple 1 2))
5 matches
Mail list logo
