xxxxxx@ai.mit.edu writes:
>    One minor whinge concerning SRFI-13:
>    We still don't have string-split.
>
>    <grovel mode=abject>
>    Please, please, please, please, please, please...
>    </grovel>
>
> You're covered, dude. You just say
>     (string-tokenize s char-set:graphic)

Well, my current deal (I'm feeding the code-repository wombat
a source-code control system written in Scsh) needs something like:

	(string-split s "@")

but path manipulators want

	(string-split s ":") - or - (string-split s ";")

And when I port Scsh's nifty filename-manipulations I'll be wanting
the ever-lovin'

	(string-split s "/")

I know that Oleg and I aren't a majority, but hey, this is a fairly
common thing to do. I even implemented it (not, of course, in full
Shiverian generality) in the time that I was waiting for a response.

(define (string-split s delimiter)
   (let ((sl (string-length s))
	 (dl (string-length delimiter)))
      (let unfold ((index 0) (strings '()))
	 (let ((start (string-contains s delimiter index)))
	    (if start
		(unfold (+ start dl)
			(cons (substring s index start) strings))
		(reverse (cons (substring s index sl) strings))
		)))
      ))

but even string-tokenize which admitted a predicate function parameter
type would make it semantically easy (as in: not involving SRFI-14) to
write all these little snippets.

> And, by the way, we *definitely* need to get a good parser/unparser thing
> defined. A number->string converter that takes all the field-width, padding,
> and other options that a full PRINTF implementation would use, a regexp SRFI,
> a LALR parser macro like Manuel Serrano's got in bigloo, etc.

Absolutely. The read/rp read/lalrp stuff in Bigloo is one of it's
bigger wins. It's amazing how quickly you can write syntactically
aware tools for less-privileged languages using it.

david rush
--
Did mentioning Scsh gain me any points?