New draft (#4) of SRFI 204: Wright-Cartwright-Shinn Pattern Matcher Arthur A. Gleckler (02 Aug 2020 16:15 UTC)
Re: New draft (#4) of SRFI 204: Wright-Cartwright-Shinn Pattern Matcher Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (02 Aug 2020 17:17 UTC)
(missing)
(missing)
(missing)
(missing)
(missing)
Re: New draft (#4) of SRFI 204: Wright-Cartwright-Shinn Pattern Matcher Felix Thibault (04 Aug 2020 03:33 UTC)

Re: New draft (#4) of SRFI 204: Wright-Cartwright-Shinn Pattern Matcher Felix Thibault 04 Aug 2020 03:33 UTC

Ok, I've made changes like:

(define-syntax ___
  (syntax-rules ()
    ((_ expr ...)
     (syntax-error "___ outside of pattern"))))

to the original match/match.scm.
And added all the new syntax I've defined to the exports for the Guile
module, and it's still passing all the tests,
So are there some new tests I can add to make sure these changes are
having their intended effect?

On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 1:16 PM Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
<xxxxxx@nieper-wisskirchen.de> wrote:
>
> The implementation still does not bind the identifiers "..1", etc. to syntax.
>
> Please add bindings to auxiliary syntax (as R[6/7]RS binds "else",
> "=>", "...", "_", etc.).
>
> Marc