Just to let you know, I had realized that after I finished the
codebase, I
was well on my way to implementing a full dialect of scheme where
basically
all of the primitive forms had analog macro implementations which
tracked
everything you were trying to do--like test-let and things of that
nature.
So an arbitrary Scheme source would be processed by the hypothetical
'test-compiler' (compiles Scheme -> Test-Scheme)? How would the
expected result be specified?
Or is it arbitrary? Are the parallel special forms to be used
directly? Like (test-let <expected> ([...] ...) ...), where each test
version of an expression has extra test attributes?
<snip>
(the higher
order function to produce the various kinds of output given the tree
structure to this day I think is a perfect solution)
<snip>
I may chg the various tree-node representations into record-
structures, for a slight speed-up. No visible API chg though. ("may
chg" since they would need to be srfi-9 records as Chicken records
are not common.)
Thank you for your contribution, I very much appreciate it.
Your welcome. I committed a new release so it should be available
soon. Has the TBD I mentioned earlier. I do plan to add Chicken
compiler declarations to restrict the exported names, but this isn't
a visible chg.
-pete
_______________________________________________
Chicken-users mailing list
Chicken-users@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
