Hello, > The syntactic changes you propose all make sense to me, FWIW.
Great! Then I will push an implementation soon unless someone else objects. > A more general question about PEG: how do you bind a variable to the > result of a pattern? For instance, if you want the result of (* "a") to > be bound to variable X–just like (match '(1 2 3) ((a _ ...) a)) binds A > to 1. We currently don't have that ability. I can see that it would be very convenient, though, so maybe we should have it. Right now I think you could get the same thing by running match on the output of the peg - something like (match (peg:tree (peg-parse <pattern> <tree>)) ((list-of-as) ...)). Do you think that's a good enough interface, or should the binding happen directly? I can see that it would be more efficient if we didn't box up the results in a structure first. Thanks, Noah