Re: Strange error from define-syntax
"John Schlomann" writes: > define-macro works perfectly for me, even though the Guile manual seems to > somewhat disparage its use. Well, it's not the modern Scheme way but at the current point of time LilyPond works best with Guile 1.8. -- David Kastrup
RE: Strange error from define-syntax
define-macro works perfectly for me, even though the Guile manual seems to somewhat disparage its use. Thank you, David. John > -Original Message- > From: David Kastrup [mailto:d...@gnu.org] > Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2020 2:02 PM > To: John Schlomann > Cc: 'Lilypond-User Mailing List' > Subject: Re: Strange error from define-syntax > > "John Schlomann" writes: > > > Thank you, David, for your quick response. I'm not sure what you mean by > > "stick to macros". I thought define-syntax was the way to define a macro. > > What am I missing? > > define-macro and defmacro apparently. > > -- > David Kastrup
Re: Strange error from define-syntax
"John Schlomann" writes: > Thank you, David, for your quick response. I'm not sure what you mean by > "stick to macros". I thought define-syntax was the way to define a macro. > What am I missing? define-macro and defmacro apparently. -- David Kastrup
Re: Strange error from define-syntax
On 5/28/20, John Schlomann wrote: > Thank you, David, for your quick response. I'm not sure what you mean by > "stick to macros". I thought define-syntax was the way to define a macro. > What am I missing? I think David may have been referring to LilyPond macros; have a look at that for example: http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.21/Documentation/extending-big-page#interfaces-for-programmers Cheers, -- V.
RE: Strange error from define-syntax
Thank you, David, for your quick response. I'm not sure what you mean by "stick to macros". I thought define-syntax was the way to define a macro. What am I missing? John > -Original Message- > From: David Kastrup [mailto:d...@gnu.org] > Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2020 11:54 AM > To: John Schlomann > Cc: 'Lilypond-User Mailing List' > Subject: Re: Strange error from define-syntax > > "John Schlomann" writes: > > > Dear Ponders & Schemers, > > > > > > > > I wanted to try creating a simple Scheme macro. I've never done this > before, > > so I may well be going about it all wrong, but the error I get doesn't make > > sense. > > > > > > > > Here is a minimal non-working example: > > > > > > > > \version "2.20.0" > > > > #(use-modules (ice-9 syncase)) > > > > > > > > #(define-syntax set-default > > > >(syntax-rules () > > > > ((set-default name value) > > > > (if (eqv? name 'UNDEF) name value) > > > >))) > > > > > > > > #(define some-setting 44) > > > > #(set-value some-setting 99) > > > > #(ly:message "some-setting = ~a\n" some-setting) > > > > > > > > This gives the error: > > > > Wrong number of arguments to # > (arg)>> > > > > > > > > Huh? I also tried define-syntax-rule, which came up unbound. Any insights > > into what I'm doing wrong would be welcome. > > syntax-case doesn't work in LilyPond since LilyPond defines \void as a > music function and the Guile 1.8 implementation of syntax-case falls > apart if 'void has a value. > > You are not doing anything wrong other than expecting syntax-case to > work. Stick to macros instead of define-syntax. Sorry for that. > > -- > David Kastrup
Re: Strange error from define-syntax
"John Schlomann" writes: > Dear Ponders & Schemers, > > > > I wanted to try creating a simple Scheme macro. I've never done this before, > so I may well be going about it all wrong, but the error I get doesn't make > sense. > > > > Here is a minimal non-working example: > > > > \version "2.20.0" > > #(use-modules (ice-9 syncase)) > > > > #(define-syntax set-default > >(syntax-rules () > > ((set-default name value) > > (if (eqv? name 'UNDEF) name value) > >))) > > > > #(define some-setting 44) > > #(set-value some-setting 99) > > #(ly:message "some-setting = ~a\n" some-setting) > > > > This gives the error: > > Wrong number of arguments to # (arg)>> > > > > Huh? I also tried define-syntax-rule, which came up unbound. Any insights > into what I'm doing wrong would be welcome. syntax-case doesn't work in LilyPond since LilyPond defines \void as a music function and the Guile 1.8 implementation of syntax-case falls apart if 'void has a value. You are not doing anything wrong other than expecting syntax-case to work. Stick to macros instead of define-syntax. Sorry for that. -- David Kastrup
