[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: FOL
From: |
Stefan Israelsson Tampe |
Subject: |
Re: FOL |
Date: |
Thu, 16 Sep 2010 23:02:30 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.34-12-desktop; KDE/4.4.4; x86_64; ; ) |
>
> What are your plans for your Prolog compiler, in terms of releases,
> merges, and whatnot? :-)
This is on my list before I think that it will be merged/released a beta
1.
I'm in the process to replace the matchers with modified Shinn. The main
problem using prompts is that I don't get tail call's, I do have it with
the fragile umatch and Shinn! Also I will not need to patch guile sources.
I'll use a pure Scheme backend and a c-code version.
2. Write test test code - which now is a good time to start when there are
decent syntax error reports.
> > For setting up the error reporting I used a pdf
> > describing the syntax-parse macro
> >
> > http://www.ccs.neu.edu/scheme/pubs/icfp10-cf.pdf
>
> Yeah, that seems like an improvement in terms of error detection and
> error reporting (better than “source expression failed to match any
> pattern”...).
>
> However, I don’t like the aesthetics: keywords, and, worse, type
> annotations embedded in identifiers.
The syntax can be fixed, any ideas?
/Stefan
- FOL, Stefan Israelsson Tampe, 2010/09/16
- Re: FOL, Andy Wingo, 2010/09/16
- Re: FOL, Ludovic Courtès, 2010/09/16
- Re: FOL,
Stefan Israelsson Tampe <=
- Re: FOL, Ludovic Courtès, 2010/09/16