On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 7:23 PM, Gustavo Massaccesi <gust...@oma.org.ar> wrote: >>> > He wants an Arc-style lambda function. Hmph. > >>> Does it mean that I'll get an Arc-style lambda function eventually, or that >>> I'll get an explanation why it's a bad ide— wait, nevermind, I can get >>> whatever I want, 'cause it's Racket. Mwa-ha-ha. > >>> (I'd still welcome an explanation, tho.) > >>I don't think saving key strokes in Arc-style fashion is good for >>the future reader of my software. But go ahead and re-create the >>syntax or borrow it from the Arc implementation (which is some >>large Racket macro). > > In Arc the shorthand for lambdas like [* _ 2] is implemented as a > short readtable extension in MzScheme. It expands [* _ 2] to (fn (_) > (* _ 2)) at read time, and this is interpreted as Arc code. (It’s only > 15 lines of code and most of the code is boilerplate.)
I've implemented a similar thing in a somewhat-more-integrated manner here: https://github.com/samth/fancy-app My goal was to behave like Scala. I don't use this much, but I wish for it often. :) Sam ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
