Christian Jaeger <christian@pflanze.mine.nu> writes:
Joel J. Adamson wrote:
... syntax-rules macros
syntax-rules is incompatible with most Gambit specialities.
Interesting: * I have had a lot of trouble understanding the pattern language anyway, and I have a hard time seeing what the advantages of define-syntax over define-macro anyway. Any thoughts? * Can you elaborate on Gambit's specialties that are incompatible with syntax-rules? I don't have my heart set on using syntax-rules; I was under the impression that there is some huge advantage of it since in other implementations (MzScheme especially) it is used A LOT. However, last night after figuring out the namespaces thing, I wrote a syntax-rules macro that looked exactly like I could have written it in define-macro language instead. Also after doing a quick find-grep of the examples and finding no instances of syntax-rules, and many examples of define-macro, I think I'm alright with using define-macro.
whole-sourcefile transformers
Can you tell me more about this technique? Thanks -- this discussion is very helpful, Joel -- Joel J. Adamson Biostatistician Pediatric Psychopharmacology Research Unit Massachusetts General Hospital Boston, MA 02114 (617) 643-1432 (303) 880-3109 The information transmitted in this electronic communication is intended only for the person or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this information in error, please contact the Compliance HelpLine at 800-856-1983 and properly dispose of this information.