Hi, Ricardo Wurmus <rek...@elephly.net> skribis:
>> I think it would be great to have the following variant of substitute*: >> >> (substitute*-once filename (pattern vars) body) >> >> which acts like the usual substitute-*, except it also asserts that the >> substitution applies to exactly one line in the file, causing a build >> failure otherwise. > > I agree that the effect of substitute* should be checked. I think > substitute* should fail when one of its clauses failed to match > anything. > > Each clause could also accept an optional argument to make them only > match one location. We wouldn’t have to duplicate the macro for that > and it’s a simple extension to failing on zero matches. > > What do you think? That’d be a useful extension. Ludo’.
