I'm getting confused by some behavior with regards to paren-shape.
Here's what I see:
#lang racket
;;
(define-for-syntax (square-brackets? stx)
(eq? (syntax-property stx 'paren-shape) #\[))
(define-syntax
It comes from the way syntax properties are propagated through macro
transformers. There is some explanation of this in the docs; search
for syntax-property and scroll up.
Robby
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 7:05 PM, Danny Yoo d...@cs.wpi.edu wrote:
I'm getting confused by some behavior with regards
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Robby Findler
ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu wrote:
It comes from the way syntax properties are propagated through macro
transformers. There is some explanation of this in the docs; search
for syntax-property and scroll up.
Ok. Yikes, this is more complicated
This is a design issue in the ffi -- I'd really appreciate comments
from people who use it, particularly if you're using higher-order
functions (= callbacks) with pointer arguments. It's long because I
don't see a good way out, so it's partly me thinking out loud.
There is a long-standing issue
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 7:18 PM, Danny Yoo d...@cs.wpi.edu wrote:
I'm still somewhat confused, because of the following: Compare:
(syntax/loc #'foo [app op ...])
vs:
(syntax [app op ...])
The first does not have paren-shape defined, while the second does.
Is this intentional?
At Sun, 25 Mar 2012 19:58:29 -0500, Robby Findler wrote:
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 7:18 PM, Danny Yoo d...@cs.wpi.edu wrote:
I'm still somewhat confused, because of the following: Compare:
(syntax/loc #'foo [app op ...])
vs:
(syntax [app op ...])
The first does not have
6 matches
Mail list logo
