[<<][staapl][>>][..]
Fri Feb 1 12:28:01 CET 2008

macros in dictionary

that's the next step.  now i need to think hard about where this can
go wrong, with the semi-separation i have.

basicly, the preprocessing step SORTS all names, to make sure macros
are active before the rest of the code is compiled. this shouldn't
give any trouble.

the thing to look at next is the path macro definitions
travel. probably it's best to parse everything in one go: formal list
(empty for concatenative macros). forth.ss is again the place to
be. looks like make-def-parser is the function to modify.

that modification seems to work. now adjusting badnop.ss and
macro-lambda-tx.ss to build a compiler function that uses the parsed
representation to build a macro.

the problem here is that it doesn't really fit in the rpn-compile
framework.

so.. i made it fit. the "body" for macro-lex: compilers consists of 2
elements. a list of formals and a body. this is the standard format
used in the state file. md5 sum still checks.

NEXT: move the 'macro dict into the normal dict.

ouch.. can't have "123 execute" as macro.. or can we? maybe that's one
that should be delayed.. i need sleep. this smells like the beginning
of something new.. a proper way to organize the code.

a question to answer: why did i violate source concatenation by
introducing locals? the answer is of course out of convienience, but
is there a real disadvantage? the macros themselves are still
compositional.. this is just about source.



[Reply][About]
[<<][staapl][>>][..]