public inbox for
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Damien MATTEI <>
Subject: Re: behavior of CASE with strings PART 2
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 10:04:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

Le Thursday 19 January 2017 05:53:05 Per Bothner, vous avez écrit :
> On 01/17/2017 10:36 PM, Per Bothner wrote:
> > I think this is something to think of for the Kawa 3.0 release,
> > using the new PATTERN construct in each clause.
> The invoke branch has a 'match' form, which has the syntax:
> (match TARGET-EXPR (PATTERN BODY...) ...)
> This matches TARGET-EXPR against each PATTERN, until one matches,
> at which point the BODY... forms are evaluated.
> This is the 'match' form from Racket:
> Unfortunately, the implemented forms of PATTERN are very
> limited, but the intention to allow literals and quoted forms.
> These will be compared using equal?, so you will be able to write:
>     (match "yes"
>      ("no" #f)
>      ("yes" #t))
> THIS IS NOT YET IMPLEMENTED.  (It's not conceptually hard; I just need to
> decide the best way to present such match forms.)
> I think this is the generalization of 'case' that we're looking for.

Hi Per,

thanks for your answer...
i read the many answers to the mailing list about CASE and STRINGS and delayed my answer because i 
wanted to answer after having a solution (still not done)

i understand the various implementation of Scheme follow or not the R5RS and R7RS
 but this could be changed in a future revision because it is limitating to be able to use CASE with STRINGS
in language such as ASP, Java and not Scheme, with Racket it seems that equal? predicate is used,
so probably my code will work with Racket.

i think of many solutions and finalyy begin to write a  recursive macro implementing a case-string
 but i'm facing proble with multiple "ellipsis" in a recursive macro and wanted to debug it this morning 
when  i read your last message, so here it is:

;; CASE adapted for string comparison

(define-syntax case-string
  (syntax-rules ()
    ((_ var
	(lst res)
	(... ...)
	(else => res-else))
     (if (member var lst)
	 (case var
	   (... ...)
	   (else => res-else))))
    ((_ var
	(else => res-else))


ellispsis have to be fixed and the behavior seems to be not defined in R5RS i tried many scheme and it behave diffrently, even in Racket with #lang R5RS
it does not work now


--,, UNS / OCA / CNRS

  reply	other threads:[~2017-01-19 10:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-01-17 10:07 Damien MATTEI
2017-01-17 13:24 ` Per Bothner
2017-01-17 15:57   ` Jamison Hope
2017-01-18  6:37     ` Per Bothner
2017-01-19  4:53       ` Per Bothner
2017-01-19 10:04         ` Damien MATTEI [this message]
2017-01-19 16:00           ` Per Bothner
2017-01-21  9:47         ` Damien Mattei
2017-01-22  4:36           ` match form as a generalization of case Per Bothner
2017-01-23 22:12             ` Damien Mattei
2017-01-23 22:27               ` Per Bothner
2017-01-20 22:54 behavior of CASE with strings PART 2 Damien Mattei

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).