Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!lll-winken!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!mintaka!ai-lab!zurich.ai.mit.edu!jaffer
From: jaffer@zurich.ai.mit.edu (Aubrey Jaffer)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme
Subject: Re: Macros
Message-ID: <JAFFER.91May31124647@aarau.ai.mit.edu>
Date: 31 May 91 16:46:47 GMT
References: <1490@yoakum.cs.utexas.edu> <6055@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au>
Sender: news@ai.mit.edu
Organization: M.I.T. Artificial Intelligence Lab.
Lines: 11
In-reply-to: ok@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au's message of 31 May 91 08:47:54 GMT

>My basic gripe about things like extend-syntax is that it seems absurd
>to me to provide a complicated pattern language for macros, yet provide
>no pattern matching at all for ordinary code.  I am thinking about
>writing a macro (!) that compiles a pattern-case form along the lines
>described in Peyton-Jones, so that one could write
...
>Does that sound useful?  I could post the draft spec for criticism.

Yes it does.  I would also be interested in code for a function (as
opposed to new syntax).  I need to pattern match keys in a database
against user defined templates.