We've actually discussed changing our expression representation to use types instead of the more lisp-like symbols for distinguishing expression types. That would allow dispatch on expression types and be more compact. It would, however, break almost all macros that do any kind of expression inspection.
On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 2:48 AM, Gray Calhoun <gcalh...@iastate.edu> wrote: > On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 11:50:44 AM UTC-5, Steven G. Johnson > wrote: >> >> On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 12:20:59 PM UTC-4, Gray Calhoun wrote: >>> >>> Are there better ways to do this in general? >>> >> >> For this kind of expression-matching code, you may find the Match.jl >> package handy (https://github.com/kmsquire/Match.jl), to get ML- or >> Scala-like symbolic pattern-matching. >> > > Thanks, that's pretty cool. For simple cases like I'm using, do you know > if there are advantages (or disadvantages) to using Match.jl, or should I > just view it as a nicer syntax? (Obviously, when things get more > complicated Match.jl looks very appealing). >
