I committed a variant of this that is probably closer to your earlier version.
There's no point specializing the message to phase -1, because no expression is compiled in that phase. Also, as you suggested before, I prefer leaving out "phase 0", since that makes the message simpler for the common case. At Thu, 21 Jan 2010 14:50:39 -0700, Jon Rafkind wrote: > One more adjustment that maps 1,0,-1 to "syntax", "runtime", "template" > respectively. > > On 01/21/2010 10:23 AM, Jon Rafkind wrote: > > Attached is a patch to do basically this. I haven't erased references > > to 'transformer', though. > > > > On 01/20/2010 06:28 PM, Jon Rafkind wrote: > >> Could the error message for unbound identifiers always give the > >> phase? As a corollary I dislike the name 'transformer environment'. > >> > >> So instead of: > >> compile: unbound identifier in module (transformer environment) > >> in: take > >> --> > >> compile: unbound identifier in module (phase 1) in: take > >> > >> And in phase 2 I don't get any special indication at all (like > >> 'transformer environment'). > >> > >> compile: unbound identifier in module in: take > >> --> > >> compile: unbound identifier in module (phase 2) in: take > >> > >> Maybe 'phase 0' could be elided during that phase since its the most > >> common thing and people probably don't want to see it. > >> _________________________________________________ > >> For list-related administrative tasks: > >> http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-dev > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > [text/x-patch "unbound.patch"] [~/Desktop & open] [~/Temp & open] > _________________________________________________ > For list-related administrative tasks: > http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-dev _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-dev
