On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 10:26:58 +0100, "Jörg F. Wittenberger"
 <joerg.wittenber...@softeyes.net> wrote:

> Against which file version should I do the patch?

Please use the latest version in git repo on "develop" branch.
I've already incorporated some of the changes you just submitted,
basically the type annotations and a tweaked version of your "translate-cl".

It's *easiest* for me if you use git, but you don't need to.
If you don't want to install and use git, you can download the current version 
this way:
... but please let me know when you downloaded it.  That will make it
is easier for me to integrate if there are other changes.

> No, it does not compute any value upon entry...

You're right, sorry.

> > the case should compute and return ONLY what it needs to compute.
> > I presume that this isn't working:
> >      '+++CL-QUASIQUOTE-abbreviation+++
> > but you could replace *just* that with this format, yes?:
> >     (string->symbol "+++CL-QUASIQUOTE-abbreviation+++")
> Yes, I could.  But THIS would be one computation for each invocation (of 
> the matching case here).  Now this is rather cheap: a hash table lookup 
> per quasiquote/unquote/unquote-splicing which in turn are rare.

Okay.  It's not clear to me that this optimization is worth it, but
I think with the addition of a type declaration it'll be obvious enough.
Let's just add the type declaration and do it as proposed.

> > Why all the redefines from "body" to "read-body"?
> > We normally use the same name as per the grammar.
> RScheme idiosyncratic: `body` is already a bound elsewhere within some 
> code required com compile this code.
> Hence RScheme complains about the "semantic error" and that redefinition 
> would break things.
> The only reasonable way I saw was to change the name to avoid the conflict.
> However by re-considering the case now I understand that the desire to 
> keep `body` there literally to match the grammar.  In that case we 
> should macro-define body into read-body for RScheme only.

If Rscheme will accept that without complaint, that'd be very nice.
Otherwise, I'm happy to rename definitions to make it work... I just
want to minimize it, and document why there's a variance when it happens.

> As I said, busy by now.  Maybe next week if things go well.

Okay!  I look forward to it.  Thanks so much for your time.

--- David A. Wheeler

Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of tech innovation.
Intel(R) Software Adrenaline delivers strategic insight and game-changing 
conversations that shape the rapidly evolving mobile landscape. Sign up now. 
Readable-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to