[gambit-list] Compiling programs that use syntax-case macros

Marc Feeley feeley at iro.umontreal.ca
Thu Sep 26 16:03:23 EDT 2013

On 2013-09-26, at 3:00 PM, Panicz Maciej Godek <godek.maciek at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2013/9/26 Marc Feeley <feeley at iro.umontreal.ca>
> On 2013-09-26, at 11:34 AM, Caolan McMahon <caolan.mcmahon at gmail.com> wrote:
> > gsc -:s filename.scm
> >
> > and for interpreter:
> >
> > gsi -:s filename.scm
> >
> > ...recently had to figure this out myself :)
> This only contributes to my belief that noone reads documentation anymore...
> http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~gambit/doc/gambit-c.html#index-define_002dsyntax
> Well, that's not entirely true -- I've read a lot of documentation before
> I dared to post. I've googled for many variations of "gambit scheme define
> macros" and "gambit scheme syntax case", and it either directed me
> here http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~gambit/doc/gambit-c.html (without
> pointing to the particuar node -- which might be significant, as the
> document consists of 21 chapters), or here
> http://prael.wordpress.com/2008/06/29/r5rs-define-syntax-macros-in-gambit-scheme/
> (which doesn't mention the case for the compiler), or to some mailing
> list archives (which were difficult to digest)
> The node you've pointed to is in section 6.3 "Miscellaneous extensions" (of chapter "Scheme extensions"), together with e.g. "vector-copy". Since syntax-rules are described in R5RS, I wouldn't ever think that it might be regarded as an extension to Scheme. Furthermore, I don't know what could be the reason for making the macro feature switched off by default, so it would never come to my mind that it must be switched on explicitly.
> Perhaps if the table of contents of the documentation was a little bit more detailed, or if the documentation was generated as one node per page (so that google could index it with more precision), the chances of finding a particular information would increase.
> Anyway, I'm really glad that I wrote, because you've helped me so quickly, and so I'm grateful :)
> Thanks!
> M.

I'm sorry for overeacting...  Blame it on the frustration of being asked regularly to write more detailed/clear documentation for things that are already documented.  It is more fun and time efficient for me to answer questions on undocumented things when they come up.


More information about the Gambit-list mailing list