On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Eli Barzilay <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I think that's where logging sexp (or other objects) would be > > useful. For example, have the log receiver receiving a sexp and > > immediately handle the information contained in sexp without having > > to incur the cost of parsing. > > There are at least two features of the current system that provide > answers for this: the `log-info' and its friends are macros -- they > don't do anything if there is no receiver, which makes it convenient > to give them an argument that will do whatever processing you want to > do. So you can pass around sexprs, and do whatever you want to do > with them before you turn them into strings for the output. Also, > `log-message' receives an argument that contains arbitrary > information, which you can use to hook additional bits. > Okay - I'll look into how that works. Thanks, yc
_________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-dev
