On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 9:33 AM, Jay McCarthy <[email protected]> wrote: > I think it is very useful to be able to test that your macro has good > syntax errors.
Yes, I certainly agree. My point was just that we have mechanisms, albeit clunky ones, for testing this already -- for correct macro expansions we have far fewer tools. > > Jay > > 2011/2/17 Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <[email protected]>: >> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Jakub Piotr Cłapa <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> I don't think that having to use a separate form just to test macros would >>> be a bad idea. >> >> The primary hard part about testing macros is not syntax errors, but >> writing an "alpha-equvialent-to" comparison function, which to my >> knowledge has not ever been written in Racket. >> -- >> sam th >> [email protected] >> >> _________________________________________________ >> For list-related administrative tasks: >> http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users > > > > -- > Jay McCarthy <[email protected]> > Assistant Professor / Brigham Young University > http://faculty.cs.byu.edu/~jay > > "The glory of God is Intelligence" - D&C 93 > -- sam th [email protected] _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
