[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH 0/1] Split eval.scm into chicken.eval and c
From: |
Peter Bex |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH 0/1] Split eval.scm into chicken.eval and chicken.load modules |
Date: |
Sat, 6 May 2017 12:39:52 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) |
On Sat, May 06, 2017 at 11:48:23AM +1200, Evan Hanson wrote:
> On 2017-05-06 11:03, Evan Hanson wrote:
> > The procedure will probably be useful for some
>
> Actually, will it? I'm having a hard time thinking of a good use case
> for this, from a user's perspective. Can you think of one?
Not really, except as a shorthand for (eval '(begin-for-syntax ..)).
The thing is, I wouldn't really know where else to put this, and
it's nicer than the ##sys# prefix.
We could of course add yet another module, like chicken.internal.eval,
but I prefer to stop extreme proliferation of new modules when that
isn't really necessary. It might fit better in chicken.internal, but
I don't know how to put that there. It uses ##sys#compile-to-closure,
which of course works, but I'd prefer to eventually get rid of the ##sys#
prefixes everywhere, and moving it to chicken.internal will make that
a lot harder, I think.
On Sat, May 06, 2017 at 11:03:45AM +1200, Evan Hanson wrote:
> I suggest we call this newly-exported procedure
> "eval-for-syntax" instead. We already use the "for-syntax" convention
> across the board, whereas "meta" is entirely absent from the standard
> libraries so we'd be introducing a new term, unnecessarily, I think.
Sounds good to me.
Cheers,
Peter
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature