Re: Comments on process template syntax

[Kyle Meyer]

Ricardo Wurmus <address@hidden> writes:

> I just realized that this is not easily accomplished without warts.  The
> reason is that we have no way of distinguishing this
> [...]
> Or what about this:
>
>    (process list-file-template
>      (name some-variable-name)
>      (inputs …)
>      (outputs …))
>
> Is this a process template with two arguments “name” and
> “some-variable-name”, or is this a process with a name field whose value
> is whatever “some-variable-name” evaluates to?  The power of macros only
> gets us that far.  Sure we could add even more heuristics and check
> whether things in the first position are identifiers and such, but this
> sounds terribly complex.
>
> This can all be avoided with a tad more syntax, but it’s slightly less
> elegant:
>
>    process list-file-template (with filename)
>      name …
>      inputs …
>      outputs …
>
> [...]
>
> Thoughts?

I agree that using an identifier seems like the best solution.  I
suppose there's also the question of which word to use.  "with" seems
like a good choice to me.