On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Matthew Flatt mfl...@cs.utah.edu wrote:
Should an expression be required at the end? A `module', `unit', or
`class' body can consist of just definitions. Similarly, if an
internal-definition context ends with a definition, we could define the
result to be
At Wed, 13 Oct 2010 08:23:09 -0400, Carl Eastlund wrote:
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Matthew Flatt mfl...@cs.utah.edu wrote:
Should an expression be required at the end? A `module', `unit', or
`class' body can consist of just definitions. Similarly, if an
internal-definition context
In the case I have, though, I want the sequence to be empty. The
problem is that these bodies -- (let () ...), (parameterize () ...),
etc. -- are used for a lot of different things. A macro may splice in
a sequence that is intended to represent definitions to bind in a
scope, expressions to
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 7:08 AM, Carl Eastlund c...@ccs.neu.edu wrote:
In the case I have, though, I want the sequence to be empty. The
problem is that these bodies -- (let () ...), (parameterize () ...),
etc. -- are used for a lot of different things. A macro may splice in
a sequence that
On Jul 7, 2010, at 5:55 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
Some examples that show how useful this is:
* In the lazy language you want the implicit begin to force all
expressions except for the last one.
* I've redefined the implicit begin (in an ugly way) for my course
language to force
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Matthias Felleisen
matth...@ccs.neu.edu wrote:
On Jul 7, 2010, at 5:55 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
Some examples that show how useful this is:
* In the lazy language you want the implicit begin to force all
expressions except for the last one.
* I've
On Jul 8, 2010, at 12:09 PM, Jay McCarthy wrote:
#%module-begin as the top level controlling macro is a distinguishing
feature. Requires and provides can only be there and you know there's
only one application.
These could be an argument to the #%...-begin macro:
are-you-top-level? :: (U
On Jul 8, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
2. I do not understand why #%body isn't enough. Couldn't #%body
locally expand to the point where defs and exps are
distinguished?
Yes, it could -- and I guess that would be in analogy to
`#%module-begin'. But I generally don't like that macros
On Jul 8, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
On Jul 8, 2010, at 12:09 PM, Jay McCarthy wrote:
#%module-begin as the top level controlling macro is a distinguishing
feature. Requires and provides can only be there and you know there's
only one application.
These could be an argument to the
On Jul 7, Matthew Flatt wrote:
Short version:
I'm planning to change internal-definition expansion (anywhere that
says `body ...' in the Racket documentation) to allow expressions to
mingle with definitions. For example,
[...]
Nice!
On Jul 7, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
4. I am
10 matches
Mail list logo
