The MacroExpandJL package seems promising, but maybe I'm not able to get it to work. After updating syntax to match julia 0.4, MacroExpandJL.macroexpand_jl(STDOUT, :(module M function f(x) 1+@m(2) end end)) module M begin # line 1: function f(x) # line 1: 1 + @m 2 end endend
Notice how the @m 2 is still there. Also, why is everything wrapped in an extra do block inside the module? Is this a printing issue, because that expression doesn't have one. How would I go about evaluating a module and it's macros, macro expanding the whole thing, and then dumping it out? @eval seems like, name wise, it should do this but it doesn't. Do you first eval() the module, then @eval the module? That didn't work for me either. Predefining a macro and then trying to evaluate: > macro m(x) 1 end > @eval(:(module M function f(x) @m 2 end end)) :(module M eval(x) = begin # none, line 1: top(Core).eval(M,x) end eval(m,x) = begin # none, line 1: top(Core).eval(m,x) end # none, line 1: function f(x) # none, line 1: @m 2 end end) Also doesn't work. On Monday, March 21, 2016 at 7:54:59 AM UTC-7, Tim Holy wrote: > > On Monday, March 21, 2016 09:34:19 AM Stefan Karpinski wrote: > > Tim, I'm assuming that module must assume that no macros are defined > *and* > > then used within the module body. If that does occur, the only way to do > > macro expansion correctly is to evaluate the module since the module > > definition can depend on arbitrary previously evaluated code. > > Probably true. I haven't played with it in a long time, but it's possible > you > could load the module (so the macros are defined) and then parse the > file...but > I can't remember if that works. > > Best, > --Tim > > > > > On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 9:00 PM, Tim Holy <tim....@gmail.com > <javascript:>> wrote: > > > It probably needs updating, but > > > https://github.com/timholy/MacroExpandJL.jl > > > might help. It lets you macroexpand a whole source file. > > > > > > Best, > > > --Tim > > > > > > On Sunday, March 20, 2016 08:53:49 PM Yichao Yu wrote: > > > > On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 8:26 PM, <vis...@stanford.edu <javascript:>> > wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > I'd like to be able to load in a module, then macroexpand the > whole > > > > > > thing, > > > > > > > > then print out the macroexpanded version. > > > > > > > > > > This should be a full, recursive macroexpand. > > > > > > > > > > I've noticed there is a function called macroexpand that normally > does > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > i want: > > > > >> macro m(x) 1 end > > > > > > > > > > .. > > > > > > > > > >> @m(2) > > > > > > > > > > 1 > > > > > > > > > >> macroexpand(:(1 + @m(2))) > > > > >> > > > > > :(1 + 1) > > > > > > > > > > so that is fine and dandy, but inside a module this doesn't seem > to > > > > > > work: > > > > >> macroexpand(:( > > > > >> > > > > > module M > > > > > macro m(x) 1 end > > > > > x = 1 + @m(2) > > > > > end > > > > > )) > > > > > : > > > > > :(module M > > > > > : > > > > > eval(x) = begin # none, line 2: > > > > > top(Core).eval(M,x) > > > > > > > > > > end > > > > > > > > > > eval(m,x) = begin # none, line 2: > > > > > top(Core).eval(m,x) > > > > > > > > > > end # none, line 3: > > > > > $(Expr(:macro, :(m(x)), quote # none, line 3: > > > > > 1 > > > > > > > > > > end)) # none, line 4: > > > > > x = 1 + @m(2) > > > > > end) > > > > > > > > > > As you can see in the second to last line, @m(2) is not expanded, > and > > > > > > I'm > > > > > > > > confused as to why that is. > > > > > > > > > > Ideally, this macroexpanding of a module would allow me to also > > > > > resolve > > > > > imports and includes properly, so I could just slurp up a file and > > > > > dump > > > > > out > > > > > the macroexpanded version. > > > > > > > > TL;DR this is generally not possible without evaluating the whole > > > > module. > > > > > > > > Macros are executed at parse time and therefore resolved in global > > > > scope (since local scope doesn't even exist yet) or in another word > > > > module scope. > > > > Therefore when doing macro expansion in a new module, the macros > needs > > > > to be resolved in the new module and since there's no way to > > > > statically know what macros are available in a module you can't do > > > > that without evaluating the module. > > > > > > > > > Thank you! > > > > > > > > > > Vishesh > >