From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACD7C1F5AF for ; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 10:10:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232245AbhC2KJe (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Mar 2021 06:09:34 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:44402 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231755AbhC2KJB (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Mar 2021 06:09:01 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-x430.google.com (mail-wr1-x430.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::430]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 868EBC061574 for ; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 03:09:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr1-x430.google.com with SMTP id k8so12239528wrc.3 for ; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 03:09:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=yD1JYFl7Pfbr3BVA3/ZDsB92qajJsz0H6BXs3ActtpU=; b=d4LOTe9kT77JB2D1PukIcTL2FKpim2JZCFkU7YKK2kN6IWCJ+6b2G0saiFaqbpKtpx HzIBu2h04TtsHKzSN+sn9kQ7c/fzMPsw4lgFf8APebGnJ6sqnpHugz1wF/pwmYb156K5 O0kr1M5EzAhL1gy7rUxiiXleKdXihwODG3bjbBXdBeAALIh1swjTpy5sjLlUdVK9IVJc +Egn6kPQiYlOYeK8Qq4ev3atTZ+aXFrTox6bys/9Oc1lk+zykNZUVq94KrfntRO0sEQH vIm6pYoN749tr6IV6cTHRvQbg0NZLhlIgTp0mm60Ez23FbOl13oHLpfzaXc2lzEGXN5y H4qw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=yD1JYFl7Pfbr3BVA3/ZDsB92qajJsz0H6BXs3ActtpU=; b=AvJSblNZXWh27WviQI59Tioh6SVK+MOdCW+VLJ2YwjnLPmH8F3m1HdNAWv//bVXOUn dJeD/vMQYI1doJ0FXOYf6zeuqgk937eGOvJrmqud3GFhY4/3HHbfTBoE22wCvH77ykPX ix63H2WQ0vk1mAvl9yG8SZL2JaRU+5P4Vr2jVDy9jViWX61Ru7javxuAgZouZ/Nj35iN BuwAWpD8nnmKgSyQuLsQ9a2zegrWEDq0mHemJz4UQAwkgReiMzqBHRPt19r65XqDxgSQ AcGwHIiRsOGGQm3ZQjBWD8DnPDhkHEb/8LquIhrEnfqzV7GaaHnnfUk8a4y7fnxoZsCu xDgg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532nSe5b2rIQscbpGK8Eao4hob/XhR2XReJ98fEAYLIm/7BEl98O VsS3yZTbvy6pFpUVon6fgEdV1TXPu98= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwAn82Pvv9f1rvw4bWhXfIKngvrnOVwItoT07CZtwmhn8zaf2xuMQTcYY4HH8yDAMbRA7yHJw== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6412:: with SMTP id z18mr27800959wru.214.1617012538839; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 03:08:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.201] (243.20.198.146.dyn.plus.net. [146.198.20.243]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id a15sm19045650wrr.53.2021.03.29.03.08.57 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 29 Mar 2021 03:08:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [GSOC][PATCH] userdiff: add support for Scheme To: Atharva Raykar , =?UTF-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsCBCamFybWFzb24=?= Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org References: <20210327173938.59391-1-raykar.ath@gmail.com> <87blb4nf2n.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <578FC14B-CB72-41CA-A8FD-1480EBCCB968@gmail.com> From: Phillip Wood Message-ID: <62695830-2f9e-c3b5-856c-01b97eb2c3af@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2021 11:08:57 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <578FC14B-CB72-41CA-A8FD-1480EBCCB968@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Hi Atharva On 28/03/2021 13:40, Atharva Raykar wrote: > On 28-Mar-2021, at 08:46, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: >> The "define-?.*" can be simplified to just "define.*", but looking at >> the tests is that the intent? From the tests it looks like "define[- ]" >> is what the author wants, unless this is meant to also match >> "(definements". > > Yes, you captured my intent correctly. Will fix it. > >> Has this been tested on some real-world scheme code? E.g. I have guile >> installed locally, and it has really large top-level eval-when >> blocks. These rules would jump over those to whatever the function above >> them is. > > I do not have a large scheme codebase on my own, I usually use Racket, > which is a much larger language with many more forms. Other Schemes like > Guile also extend the language a lot, like in your example, eval-when is > an extension provided by Guile (and Chicken and Chez), but not a part of > the R6RS document when I searched its index. > > So the 'define' forms are the only one that I know would reliably be present > across all schemes. But one can also make a case where some of these non-standard > forms may be common enough that they are worth adding in. In that case which > forms to include? Should we consider everything in the SRFI's[1]? Should the > various module definitions of Racket be included? It's a little tricky to know > where to stop. If there are some common forms such as eval-when then it would be good to include them, otherwise we end up needing a different rule for each scheme implementation as they all seem to tweak something. Gerbil uses 'def...' e.g def, defsyntax, defstruct, defrules rather than define, define-syntax, define-record etc. I'm not user if we want to accommodate that or not. Best Wishes Phillip > That being said, I will try to run this through more Scheme codebases that I can > find and see if there are any forms that seem to show up commonly enough that they > are worth including. > > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheme_Requests_for_Implementation >