dwheeler noticed that QUOTE is not correctly specced in the original
I-Expressions SRFI. xref.
http://www.dwheeler.com/readable/readable/trunk/spec-indent.txt - text
"(8) ISSUE: QUOTE, etc."
I've updated my parser spec regarding this, but it now lacks handling
for the case of QUOTE-at-the-eol.
Proposals:
1. dwheeler: treat QUOTE-by-itself the same as GROUP-by-itself.
1.1 Pros:
1.1.1. Seems to give more "intuitive" translation.
1.2. Cons:
1.2.1. Not completely consistent with GROUP: GROUP-at-the-start is
subtly different from QUOTE-at-the-start, as the corresponding parser
spec productions show:
(i-expr lvl) -> QUOTE hspace+ (i-expr lvl)
(list 'quote $3)
(i-expr lvl) -> SPLICE head eol-comment-lines (body inlvl),
if {lvl perfect-tail-sublist-of inlvl}
(append $2 $4)
However, perhaps SPLICE-at-the-start can be modified as so:
(i-expr lvl) -> SPLICE (i-expr lvl)
$3
2. almkglor: treat QUOTE-whitespace the same as the symbol 'quote.
2.1. Pros:
2.1.1. Makes QUOTE etc. rules very very simple
2.2. Cons:
2.2.1. The following syntax is no longer correct:
..` let
......\
........,var ,val
......,expr
As it gets translated to (quasiquote let (((unquote var) (unquote
val))) (unquote expr))
You are required, if you use QUOTE-whitespace, to use:
..`
....let
......\
........,var ,val
......,expr
However, it could be argued that this is actually *clearer* - but we
do lose the vertical space, sadly.
My vote is "almkglor's proposal".
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Readable-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/readable-discuss
