Yes, this did the trick! I needed to add datum->syntax to the identifiers
in BOTH macros. In my initial attempt I only added it to the defining macro.
More importantly, I now understand why I needed to do it this way. I plan
to eventually refactor it to pass the identifier in directly instead of
> On May 28, 2019, at 7:11 AM, Jonathan Simpson wrote:
>
> Both the function definition and function calls are created by similar
> looking macros which pass strings as the function name. I've now taken steps
> to break hygiene in the defining macro, but the calling macro just converts
> the
On Tuesday, May 28, 2019 at 1:45:35 AM UTC-4, Alexis King wrote:
>
> > On May 27, 2019, at 22:28, Jonathan Simpson > wrote:
> >
> > I may be missing something, but I didn't think I could use the name as
> valid syntax since this is the form that is creating it. If passing a
> symbol in would
Sorry. It is probably better to ignore the part about the second
syntax-case clause for now. I didn't provide the necessary background to
make sense of it. Once I get past my current problem it probably won't be
relevant anyway. I'm currently hitting the unbound identifier error in both
clauses
On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 7:54 PM Greg Hendershott
wrote:
> p.s. That (datum->syntax _ (string->symbol (syntax->datum _))) triplet
> has an equivalent handy shortcut -- `format-id`:
>
> (format-id #'magic-name "~a" #'magic-name)
This doesn't work in the string literal case because an argument
> On May 27, 2019, at 22:28, Jonathan Simpson wrote:
>
> I may be missing something, but I didn't think I could use the name as valid
> syntax since this is the form that is creating it. If passing a symbol in
> would work then I could potentially change my lexer to do that instead of a
> stri
It seemed like most of your question was about creating the name
identifier for the `define`. I focused on (and hopefully answered) that
part. But I didn't pick up on what you said the error message was:
>> attempts to use with-syntax* also fail with errors like "modified-rst:
>> unbound identifie
In case this helps, here is the output from the macro stepper for a sample
macro invocation:
(named-query
(name-line (offset 0) (name-type "name") "always-true")
(level)
(line (offset 0) (type (default "default")) (test (truetest "x"
->
(define:24 always-true
Thanks for the quick response. I wouldn't have gotten as far as I have so
far without your 'Fear of Macros' page, so thanks for that as well!
On Monday, May 27, 2019 at 10:54:50 PM UTC-4, Greg Hendershott wrote:
>
> If users of your `named-query` macro will supply the name as an
> identifier --
If users of your `named-query` macro will supply the name as an
identifier -- an unquoted symbol like some-name in this example:
(named-query (name-line (_ 0) (_ "name") some-name))
Then what your macro needs to do with the pattern variable is... just
use it -- as is -- in the template. (It is
10 matches
Mail list logo
