Hi Alex,

On Fri 20 May 2011 09:08, Alex Shinn <alexshinn@gmail.com> writes:

> existing syntactic-closures implementations simply can't support
> single argument expanders (modulo hypothetical rewrites to their macro
> systems discussed in this thread).

Characterizing what seems to me to be a minor change as a "rewrite" is
not accurate.

Example: Guile's copy of psyntax is some 2500 lines long.  If arity-3
syntax transformers were the thing, I would only have to change the
"expand-macro" routine (called chi-macro for silly reasons).  That
procedure is only 50 lines long, and I wouldn't have to do very much to
it.

If -- and who are we talking about here, is it a Chicken and Chibi
thing, only?  Chibi can't be the point there, because surely you are
amenable to sensible changes, and you have a more nimble user base.  Is
it just Chicken -- so if Chicken is willing to make this minor change,
then I think we should do it, because it's more fundamental *and* more
extensible in the future.  Has anyone asked?  Are you representing them
both here, somehow?

Anyway if the `define-syntax (lambda (x y z a b c) ...)' folk are
holding out on this change, hey that's fine too.  I think that the WG2
standard will be less useful in that case, however.

Regards,

Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports