On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 21:42:14 -0600,
Ryan Culpepper wrote:
>
> On 11/16/2016 07:51 PM, Vincent St-Amour wrote:
> > FWIW, Eric Dobson wrote a very nice `define-literal-syntax-class` macro
> > that is used extensively inside TR.
> >
> >
> > https://github.com/racket/typed-racket/blob/master/typ
On 11/16/2016 08:24 PM, Dan Liebgold wrote:
FWIW, Eric Dobson wrote a very nice `define-literal-syntax-class` macro
that is used extensively inside TR.
https://github.com/racket/typed-racket/blob/master/typed-racket-lib/typed-racket/utils/literal-syntax-class.rkt
Hmm... I can't quite fig
On 11/16/2016 07:51 PM, Vincent St-Amour wrote:
FWIW, Eric Dobson wrote a very nice `define-literal-syntax-class` macro
that is used extensively inside TR.
https://github.com/racket/typed-racket/blob/master/typed-racket-lib/typed-racket/utils/literal-syntax-class.rkt
Its companion `define-
On 11/16/2016 07:42 PM, Dan Liebgold wrote:
Literal sets can include datum-literals:
(define-literal-set lits #:datum-literals (a b c) (d e))
Ah, oops I missed that keyword parameter.
For question 1, that's probably the best way. If you want to suppress
the printing of all of the datum
> FWIW, Eric Dobson wrote a very nice `define-literal-syntax-class` macro
> that is used extensively inside TR.
>
>
> https://github.com/racket/typed-racket/blob/master/typed-racket-lib/typed-racket/utils/literal-syntax-class.rkt
>
Hmm... I can't quite figure that one out. Maybe with some ex
FWIW, Eric Dobson wrote a very nice `define-literal-syntax-class` macro
that is used extensively inside TR.
https://github.com/racket/typed-racket/blob/master/typed-racket-lib/typed-racket/utils/literal-syntax-class.rkt
Its companion `define-merged-syntax-class` is quite nice too.
https:
>
> Literal sets can include datum-literals:
>
>(define-literal-set lits #:datum-literals (a b c) (d e))
>
Ah, oops I missed that keyword parameter.
> For question 1, that's probably the best way. If you want to suppress
> the printing of all of the datum literals in error messages, you c
On 11/16/2016 06:11 PM, Dan Liebgold wrote:
Hi,
A couple questions about literals in syntax-parse:
1. I'd like to make a syntax-class that is just a set of literals
(with a clear error for something not matching any literal). Is there
a better way than this:
http://pasterack.org/pastes/86722
Hi,
A couple questions about literals in syntax-parse:
1. I'd like to make a syntax-class that is just a set of literals (with a clear
error for something not matching any literal). Is there a better way than this:
http://pasterack.org/pastes/86722
I need to ignore the bindings for those ident
9 matches
Mail list logo