Hi all,
not exactly chicken related; but I hope someone here can help me.
I'm trying to replace an unhygienic macro with a syntax-rules
based version. Just I can't.
What I need is a sub-macro.
http://community.schemewiki.org/?scheme-faq-macros#H-1tseqi3
I want to have a define-alike to create procedures with
a certain signature. Within the body of the created procedure
I need some syntax to access the parameters of the created
procedure. The purpose however is to *not* repeat the
parameter list in the definitions (since that's what might
change, hence the definer macro to hide the precise signature).
Here my current state of affairs:
;; The definer:
(define-syntax deftig
(syntax-rules ()
((_ name . body) ;; Within this "body" I want some rewrites.
(define name
(lambda (x y)
(let-syntax
((pinapple
(syntax-rules ()
((_ ((p v) ...) . body)
(let-syntax ((helper (syntax-rules ()
((_ p ...) (begin . body)))))
(helper v ...))))))
;; trying to bind "foo" and "gosh" within "body" here
(pinapple ((foo (x y)) (gosh y)) . body)))))
;; This alternate version did not grok it either:
((_ "pinapple" ((p v) ...) . body)
(let-syntax ((helper (syntax-rules ()
((_ p ...) (begin . body)))))
(helper v ...)))
#;((_ name body ...)
(define name
(lambda (x y)
(deftig "pinapple" ((foo (x y)) (gosh y)) body ...))))
))
;; An example of intended usage:
(define (foog x) (* x 2))
;; "foo" and "gosh" ought to be replaced, but aren't.
(deftig bar (foo) (foog 2) (foog 2.5) (let ((n (gosh))) (foog n)) 'phar)
----
The pinapple is actually stolen from let-alias
http://community.schemewiki.org/?scheme-faq-macros#H-uren6
which was the closes thing I could find so far.
But it seems only to get close to the job when used in the
let-syntax way as above. At least I've been able to
get partial results. But no flowers.
Any help very much appreciated.
/Jörg
.......
_______________________________________________
Chicken-users mailing list
Chicken-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
