Hi, I managed to do what you said, the result is at
https://gitorious.org/syntax-closures I changed it so that it is enough to do (use-modules (srfi srfi-72)) and hacking along with it using both #, and #,@ Especially #,@ was difficult but using the ck macro the appending become more natural. I would expect the code to be quite expensive computationally though. On a side note, the quasisyntax expander will severely transform syntaxes of the form (a b c #,@( ...) a) though and therefore any macro that assume that this list can have some form on say 'a b c', will fail because the whole list will be transformed by quasisyntax. It is possible to introduce splicing macros in psyntax I think and then the system would be even more true to the srfi-72. Because I suspect that the srfi-72 spec and the huge transformation of the list e.g. append macros, does not mix well. Anyway it was a fun hack, thanks! /Stefan On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 5:38 PM, Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> wrote: > On Tue 22 Jan 2013 17:19, Stefan Israelsson Tampe <stefan.ita...@gmail.com> > writes: > >>> > (read-hash-extend #\_ syntax-closure-reader) >>> >>> Have you tried having your srfi-72 module export a binding for unsyntax? >> >> I would like to use that of cause, but does it mix well with other >> already written code? > > It should work in a modular fashion. #,foo reads as (unsyntax foo), and > the meaning of that depends on the binding of unsyntax that is current. > > Andy > -- > http://wingolog.org/
