SISC

On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 12:40:20PM -0700, Dan wrote:
> It seems that a syntax-case macro cannot use a
> function defined in the same module:

You need to let the module system know that the macro needs the 
function, eg:

(module mod ((mac1 f))
  ... )

	Scott

> You need to let the module system know that the
> macro needs the 
> function, eg:
> 
> (module mod ((mac1 f))
>   ... )

Thanks, but I get the same error (in SISC 1.15.1):

(module mod ((mac1 f))

  (define (f x) x)
  
  (define-syntax mac1
    (lambda (syn)
      (syntax-case syn ()
        ((orig . args)
         (with-syntax
             ((res (datum->syntax-object
                    (syntax orig)
                    (apply f (syntax-object->datum
                              (syntax args))))))
           (syntax res))))))

)


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

I asked the same question on comp.lang.scheme, as
Chicken showed the same symtomps. Turns out that
syntax-case from release 6.9c onwards supports a
(meta) prefix for just this purpose, i.e. 

"tells the expander that any variable definition
resulting from the definition is to be an expand-time
definition available only on the  right-hand sides of
other meta definitions and, most importantly, to 
transformer expressions."

Why not upgrade to the latest psyntax.ss from
http://www.cs.indiana.edu/chezscheme/syntax-case/ ? :)
I will try to build a custom SISC version and see how
it works.

-- Dan

--- "Scott G. Miller" <scgmille@...>
wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 12:40:20PM -0700, Dan wrote:
> > It seems that a syntax-case macro cannot use a
> > function defined in the same module:
> 
> You need to let the module system know that the
> macro needs the 
> function, eg:
> 
> (module mod ((mac1 f))
>   ... )
> 
> 	Scott
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

Dan <greenash@...> writes:

> Why not upgrade to the latest psyntax.ss from
> http://www.cs.indiana.edu/chezscheme/syntax-case/ ? :)

Because doing so is fiendishly difficult. We tried several times and
gave up after a while.

Let that not deter you though. We have been looking for volunteers to
take on this task for some time. If you want to have a go we will give
you all the support we can.


Matthias

> Because doing so is fiendishly difficult. We tried
> several times and gave up after a while.

Hm... it looks like there are fairly subtantial
changes in psyntax.ss between and 6.9 to 6.9c, as well
as between 6.9 and sisc-6.9. So there's probably no
easy way. I should have looked first.

Getting back to my problem though, another solution is
to define the funcion in a separate top-level module.
Is that OK with SISC ? Can I define two top-level
modules in the same file? How does that interact with
(require-extension (lib ...)) ?

-- Dan

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

Dan <greenash@...> writes:

> Hm... it looks like there are fairly subtantial
> changes in psyntax.ss between and 6.9 to 6.9c, as well
> as between 6.9 and sisc-6.9. So there's probably no
> easy way. I should have looked first.

Don't be scared to give the upgrade to 6.9c another go.

> Can I define two top-level modules in the same file?

Yes.

> How does that interact with (require-extension (lib ...)) ?

It should work ok, though I haven't tried it.

You could also put the modules into separate files and use
|require-library| in one to load the other.


Matthias

Hi,

Is the new pattern-matching facility documented
anywhere?

Also, there seems to be an unwanted interaction with
srfi-23:

SISC (1.15.2)
#;> (import pattern-matching)
#;> (match '(a) (x x))
Error in match: Unmatched datum: (a)
#;> (require-extension (srfi 23))
#;> (match '(a) (x x))
Error in string-append: expected type string, got
'match'.

-- Dan

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

Dan,

Dan <greenash@...> writes:

> Is the new pattern-matching facility documented
> anywhere?

It's not actually new.

There is some documentation in the code - match.ss. We should add some
documentation for it to the manual though. Please raise a Feature
Request for that.

> Also, there seems to be an unwanted interaction with
> srfi-23:
>
> SISC (1.15.2)
> #;> (import pattern-matching)
> #;> (match '(a) (x x))
> Error in match: Unmatched datum: (a)
> #;> (require-extension (srfi 23))
> #;> (match '(a) (x x))
> Error in string-append: expected type string, got
> 'match'.

It's a bad idea to import srfi-23 into the sisc top level since it
clobbers the normal sisc error reporting procedure. So Just Don't Do
That.


Matthias