Re: [Chicken-users] test-infrastructure update (1.2)

[Peter Keller]

On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 02:10:05PM -0800, Kon Lovett wrote:
> Macros are still used. Only the code that didn't depend on un- 
> evaluated syntax was wrapped in a procedure. I shifted to procs  
> because the generated output was pretty big. Any reduction was  
> considered a "good thing."

Fair enough.

Just to let you know, I had realized that after I finished the codebase, I
was well on my way to implementing a full dialect of scheme where basically
all of the primitive forms had analog macro implementations which tracked
everything you were trying to do--like test-let and things of that
nature.

While I think the testing infrastructure is amazingly useful (the higher
order function to produce the various kinds of output given the tree
structure to this day I think is a perfect solution), I was a little
queasy about implementing the full dialect, even though that is where
all roads seemed to lead giving the method that I chose.

Thank you for your contribution, I very much appreciate it.

-pete