From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22880 invoked by alias); 19 Mar 2002 20:19:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cgen-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cgen-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 22759 invoked from network); 19 Mar 2002 20:19:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO krynn.axis.se) (193.13.178.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Mar 2002 20:19:27 -0000 Received: from ignucius.axis.se (root@ignucius.axis.se [10.13.1.18]) by krynn.axis.se (8.12.1/8.12.1/Debian -5) with ESMTP id g2JKJEQI009566; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 21:19:14 +0100 Received: (from hp@localhost) by ignucius.axis.se (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) id VAA12940; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 21:19:14 +0100 Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 12:19:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200203192019.VAA12940@ignucius.axis.se> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson To: dje@transmeta.com CC: hans-peter.nilsson@axis.com, cgen@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <15511.25546.321197.323933@casey.transmeta.com> (message from Doug Evans on Tue, 19 Mar 2002 08:14:02 -0800 (PST)) Subject: Recursive expansion of pmacros (was: Re: Typo: .substr in pmacros.texi is .substring in pmacros.scm) X-SW-Source: 2002-q1/txt/msg00077.txt.bz2 > From: Doug Evans > Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 08:14:02 -0800 (PST) > Hans-Peter Nilsson writes: > > > Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 14:05:29 -0500 > > > From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" > > > > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 07:57:08PM +0100, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > > > It would IMHO be very useful if .sym-built symbols were > > > > .pmacro-expanded, as I initially thought. [...] > > > > > > I see this sort of recursive macro-expansion could be useful. > > > Does someone have an argument against it? > > > > I didn't see any argument against it, except for the comment in > > the code. This works for my simple command-line examples > > including the one in the comment but beware of the scheme/CGEN > > newbie. (Is this an ok way to compose ChangeLog entries for > > nested defines?) > > > > ! ; ??? We use to re-examine `result' to see if it was another pmacro > > ! ; invocation. This allowed doing things like ((.sym a b c) arg1 arg2) > > ! ; where `abc' is a pmacro. Scheme doesn't work this way, so it was > > ! ; removed. It can be put back should it ever be warranted. > > I'm apprehensive, but if people want to try this go ahead. Hey, time has run out for protests! :-) > If people start getting into trouble because of this I hope they share their > experience. And their joy! But that would probably be a first. ;-) > From: Doug Evans > Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 08:14:59 -0800 (PST) > btw, do you have an actual use for it? > Or is this just something that you think might be > useful in the future? As I wrote, I had already startet to depend upon it in a port in progress. I greatly simplified things (or made it hard in the absence, I should say). brgds, H-P