Rod Adams writes: > > > >You could do all of this with a library of rules. > > > > / $<x>:=<generate(@values)> <test($<x>)> / > > > > > I don't think this does what I want. In this, &generate returns a rule > or string of some kind, matches the string being tested, captures what > matches, and then binds the capture to $<x>.
You're right. We probably need something like: / <generate($<x>, @values)> <test($<x>)> / I don't know when $<x> is hypotheticalized there, if at all. It needs to be. > >Maybe we could unify the pattern proposal and your generation ideas for > >logic programming. > > There might be unification with logical programming to be had, but I'm > not sure it's with the generation part of things. I was decently insane last night. This generator stuff probably isn't going anywhere. It's too abstract, and not precise enough, to be a truly powerful part of the language. Luke