From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Israelsson Tampe Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: syntax closures Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 12:13:27 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87ip6pv0jm.fsf@pobox.com> <87d2wxqikf.fsf@pobox.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1360840434 18847 80.91.229.3 (14 Feb 2013 11:13:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 11:13:54 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Andy Wingo , guile-devel To: Mikael Djurfeldt Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 14 12:14:13 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1U5wlW-000244-Jt for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 12:14:10 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37818 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U5wlC-0000bP-L6 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 06:13:50 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:43715) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U5wl3-0000bB-Eq for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 06:13:49 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U5wkq-0003ep-Fc for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 06:13:41 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-qa0-f41.google.com ([209.85.216.41]:53050) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U5wkq-0003eS-BZ for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 06:13:28 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-qa0-f41.google.com with SMTP id hy16so2582283qab.0 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 03:13:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=xD0ff2IgUuUS+ckn0Ir7Abo6dBVJzQt8R3WV1PnnRkc=; b=Gr1E+luoFRBPCgqR9OPZWlwGMh9GgwKmwl2g+mlqty8Y5GOcEd3doPLgr+iwgg2jqj g3xN1YT00iKVCQOdinEvrhfZ7hmop7w22LE0lE2IIPKNxZfreZz+I4nnGC0s6ZfTXRiu 8rv4gjWbyXoxdCewdr5AcTm56NJcmBwnpFNzXr3WHreIkpxX8nGF8HfhMO4E2zKh8OHY d/l8Vi/cmENNWbgaEgH0uqPstYLWC45+pWsbq4y39VmZ0Wy8DUil2Wb4LMxXYQQ/m+BG 1zHC5KonHzRRRvRkcjprlvgM10oSUuVfsHFUHZfkn5gM6RwSOSWzMzodYFw4DYamVVnP 1pmA== X-Received: by 10.224.26.210 with SMTP id f18mr415615qac.49.1360840407281; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 03:13:27 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.49.54.138 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 03:13:27 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 209.85.216.41 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:15743 Archived-At: I didn't know that this was a taken name already, Let's call it guile-srfi-72, In the end it is a srfi-72 simulator that mix well with the current guile macro system but is not a perfect replacement (yet) I'll check it out, But srfi-72 really covers a need I have when writing macros with syntax-parse. I'll check the sc-macro-transformer out. /Stefan On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Mikael Djurfeldt wrote: > Just saw this. > > Right, "syntactic closures" is the name of a macro system by Alan > Bawden and Jonathan Rees: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syntactic_closures > > http://www.gnu.org/software/mit-scheme/documentation/mit-scheme-ref/Syntactic-Closures.html#Syntactic-Closures > > So, it would be good to choose a different name if what you are doing > is different. > > BTW, the sc-macro-transformer facility of MIT-scheme would be nice to have. :-) > > Best regards, > Mikael D. > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Alex Shinn wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> 2. I was actually hesistant to call this srfi-72 because of trying to >>> do what it want >>> more than what it say's. A main trick to simulate the effect was to >>> introduce >>> a closure in the syntax at one point and therefore a choose the name >>> syntax-closure not knowing that there is an already a notion of >>> that in the wild >> >> >> Oh - I thought you were referring to the existing syntactic-closures. >> I guess it's a plausible enough name to reuse coincidentally... >> >> Carry on then :) >> >> -- >> Alex >>