Re: Initial comments & questions campbell@xxxxxx 23 Mar 2004 17:40 UTC
I have yet another idea.
(SYNTAX-SEQUENCE <clause> ... <final>)
(COMPUTE <pattern> <syntactic computation>)
| (LET <pattern> <form>)
| (<syntactic computation>)
<final> -> <syntactic computation>
COMPUTE binds a pattern, a SYNTAX-RULES pattern, to the result of a
syntactic computation. LET simply binds a SYNTAX-RULES pattern with a
form, not a computation. The third kind of clause ignores the result
of a syntactic computation. The result of the SYNTAX-SEQUENCE form is
the result of the FINAL.
I also have a suggestion to rename SYNTAX-BIND to SYNTAX-EXTEND, as the
monadic >>= operator is often differently named.