Hello, > It is complicated though. The other option is to write a PEG > interpreter or compiler in Scheme. An interpreter would interpret the > s-expressions directly, or some simplified form of them. A compiler > would pre-process the s-expressions to produce a procedure, built from > closures.
Yes indeed. The thing is, we already have a compiler written in Scheme. The trouble is that it compiles S-expressions to syntax, and then it takes some trouble to get that syntax into a procedure. I think it might be cleaner if I could directly convert syntax into a procedure. For instance, what about doing (compile (peg-sexp-compile <some-s-expression>) #:from scheme-syntax #:to value) ? That seems like a nice API to me. Noah
