Konrad, you may wish to work with Stephen whose latest research project is
about combining static checking with expansion so that you don’t separate those
two steps.
> On Oct 25, 2016, at 6:20 AM, Konrad Hinsen wrote:
>
> Thanks to Dmitry, Matthias, and Alexis for their comments, which we
Thanks to Dmitry, Matthias, and Alexis for their comments, which were
very helpful to understand the principles of error reporting in DSLs.
My summary is (please correct me if I am wrong!):
1) If my DSL code expands to Racket code doing error checking/reporting
at the top level, the syntax tra
> On Oct 24, 2016, at 9:58 AM, Matthias Felleisen
> wrote:
>
> This is an interesting class of errors. As Dimitry says, you might
> be able to leave behind enough source code info when you generate
> that code, so that it looks like
>
> (define foo (if (empty? blah) (error ‘source-name “got ‘(),
> On Oct 24, 2016, at 11:00 AM, Konrad Hinsen
> wrote:
>
> Hi Dmitry,
>
>> Is it compile-time or run-time errors?
>
> Mostly module-instantiation-time errors, which are closer to run-time errors.
>
> As a simple example, consider syntactically correct DSL code that expands to
>
> (define f
Is it compile-time or run-time errors?
Mostly module-instantiation-time errors, which are closer to run-time
errors.
As a simple example, consider syntactically correct DSL code that
expands to
(define foo (first '()))
The call to first raises an exception, which is displayed without
Hi Dmitry,
Is it compile-time or run-time errors?
Mostly module-instantiation-time errors, which are closer to run-time
errors.
As a simple example, consider syntactically correct DSL code that expands to
(define foo (first '()))
The call to first raises an exception, which is displayed
Konrad,
Is it compile-time or run-time errors?
Assuming compile-time, I would suggest an approach I took for a non-SEXP
language: call raise-syntax-error in the (custom) compiler, which runs
after parser and transforms syntax objects to other syntax objects. The
third argument of raise-syntax
Hi everyone,
I am working on a DSL embedded in Racket (for the curious, it's on
GitHub: https://github.com/khinsen/leibniz) and as I am starting to use
my DSL in practice, I wish my implementation had better error reporting.
My DSL consists of a bunch of syntax transformers that expand to Rac
8 matches
Mail list logo
