Andre van Tonder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Mike Sperber wrote: > > > To make it work efficiently, you'd have > > to bring weakness in---a lot of machinery to duplicate functionality > > that would trivially work if syntax objects were abstract and thus > > extensible. > > I would differ on "trivially" ;-) Reading through the psyntax > implementation, > I think complexity would be pretty much conserved no matter how you do it.
I'm not sure I understand: Last I looked, the psyntax implementation had no source-location tracking at all. Also, I don't think Chez's implementation tracks the location of compound expressions. How does this allow you inferences about the complexity of implementing it? -- Cheers =8-} Mike Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla
