From: Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com>
To: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: pending branch: lexical-literals
Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 19:39:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m339kr919l.fsf@unquote.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <871v0cja5p.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic Courtès"'s message of "Fri, 06 May 2011 14:17:22 +0200")
On Fri 06 May 2011 14:17, ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Sorry for the late reply.
No prob; thanks for thinking through it!
> So, with this change, no top-level binding of ‘else’ is /required/, but
> /when/ there is one, it prevails over the literal, correct?
Sorta? This language is imprecise. The real language is in R6RS:
The free-identifier=? procedure returns #t if and only if the two
identifiers would resolve to the same binding if both were to appear
in the output of a transformer outside of any bindings inserted by
the transformer. (If neither of two like-named identifiers resolves
to a binding, i.e., both are unbound, they are considered to resolve
to the same binding.)
Nothing changes in the case that `else' is unbound always.
The change is if it is bound when the macro is defined, but not when it
is used, or vice versa; or, also, if it is bound at both places, but to
different lexical or toplevel variables. In these cases the
lexical-literals branch causes the literals not to match.
OTOH currently a keyword imported under a different name will not match
itself; this branch allows renaming keywords.
> But then I don’t understand how the story that you could import/rename
> ‘else’ fits into this.
I guess basically the summary is "compare literals by identity, not by
name".
Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-06 17:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-29 15:16 pending branch: lexical-literals Andy Wingo
2011-05-06 12:17 ` Ludovic Courtès
2011-05-06 17:39 ` Andy Wingo [this message]
2011-06-30 11:46 ` Andy Wingo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m339kr919l.fsf@unquote.localdomain \
--to=wingo@pobox.com \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=ludo@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).