From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kyle Meyer Subject: Re: Comments on process template syntax In-Reply-To: <874kw6slwm.fsf@elephly.net> References: <871rrdthmz.fsf@elephly.net> <87lfpjswla.fsf@elephly.net> <6be1d411b6caab4e91b67fd24bde5095afb65bc5.camel@gnu.org> <87k153spu3.fsf@elephly.net> <874kw6slwm.fsf@elephly.net> Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2020 02:12:56 +0000 Message-ID: <87zhdx3hp3.fsf@kyleam.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: Ricardo Wurmus , Roel Janssen Cc: gwl-devel@gnu.org List-ID: Ricardo Wurmus writes: > I just realized that this is not easily accomplished without warts. The > reason is that we have no way of distinguishing this > [...] > Or what about this: > > (process list-file-template > (name some-variable-name) > (inputs =E2=80=A6) > (outputs =E2=80=A6)) > > Is this a process template with two arguments =E2=80=9Cname=E2=80=9D and > =E2=80=9Csome-variable-name=E2=80=9D, or is this a process with a name fi= eld whose value > is whatever =E2=80=9Csome-variable-name=E2=80=9D evaluates to? The power= of macros only > gets us that far. Sure we could add even more heuristics and check > whether things in the first position are identifiers and such, but this > sounds terribly complex. > > This can all be avoided with a tad more syntax, but it=E2=80=99s slightly= less > elegant: > > process list-file-template (with filename) > name =E2=80=A6 > inputs =E2=80=A6 > outputs =E2=80=A6 > > [...] > > Thoughts? I agree that using an identifier seems like the best solution. I suppose there's also the question of which word to use. "with" seems like a good choice to me.