[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ‘match’ and “k or more” patterns
From: |
Alex Shinn |
Subject: |
Re: ‘match’ and “k or more” patterns |
Date: |
Mon, 6 Sep 2010 10:46:58 +0900 |
On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 12:04 AM, Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> GNU Guile 1.9 now uses your implementation of ‘match’ as a nice
> replacement for Wright’s implementation, so thank you!
>
> I stumbled upon this incompatibility: Wright’s ‘match’ supports ‘..1’,
> ‘..2’, etc., which mean “1 or more”, “2 or more”, etc., and the
> associated variable (when there’s one) is bound to the list that
> matches:
>
> (match '(a 1 2) (('a x ..1) x))
> => (1 2)
>
> AFAICS these patterns aren’t implemented in your ‘match’.
>
> Do you have plans to implement them?
Yes, these can't be implemented in syntax-rules.
It would be straightforward to implement an alternate
syntax such as
(match '(a 1 2) (('a x .. 1) x))
or generalize it to
(match '(a 1 2) (('a x <M> .. <N>) x))
where the <N> could be #f or left out to mean infinity,
which would be strictly more powerful than Wright's
syntax.
The main reason I haven't bothered adding this is
I've never needed it, and was waiting to hear reports
from people who do.
Do you have any code which actually uses the ..k
patterns? :)
--
Alex
- ‘match’ and “k or more” patterns, Ludovic Courtès, 2010/09/05
- Re: ‘match’ and “k or more” patterns,
Alex Shinn <=
- Re: ‘match’ and “k or more” patterns, Ludovic Courtès, 2010/09/06
- Re: ‘match’ and “k or more” patterns, Alex Shinn, 2010/09/07
- Re: ‘match’ and “k or more” patterns, Ludovic Courtès, 2010/09/08
- Re: ‘match’ and “k or more” patterns, Andy Wingo, 2010/09/08
- Re: ‘match’ and “k or more” patterns, Ludovic Courtès, 2010/09/19
- Message not available
- Re: ‘match’ and “k or more” patterns, Ludovic Courtès, 2010/09/27
- Re: ‘match’ and “k or more” patterns, Alex Shinn, 2010/09/27
- Message not available
- Re: ‘match’ and “k or more” patterns, Ludovic Courtès, 2010/09/28