parenscript-devel July 2007

parenscript-devel@common-lisp.net

10 participants
20 discussions

[parenscript-devel] lisp-like lambda lists (keyword, option, and rest arguments)
by Red Daly 15 Aug '07

15 Aug '07

In my local version I have added support for very Lispy lambda lists with keyword, optional, and &rest arguments. Is this a feature we should add to the language? The Javascript convention for passing named arguments is to have an options variable that functions as a hash table for keywords. I use this convention for passing keyword arguments in Parenscript. Also, when a quoted symbol (e.g. a keyword) is found in a function call, the an options object is constructed. Here are a few examples (defun name (first last &key (prefix "Ms.") (middle "")) (return (+ prefix " " first " " middle " " last))) => function name (first last options) { options.prefix = options.prefix === undefined ? "Ms." : options.prefix; options.middle = options.middle === undefined ? " " : options.middle; return prefix + " " + first " " + middle + " " + last; } (defun vote (&optional (times 1)) ...) => function vote (times) { times = times === undefined ? 1 : times; ...} (defun append (&rest lists) ...) => function append() { lists = arguments.slice(0); ...} (name "John" "Cunningham" :prefix "Mr." :middle "Appleton") => name("John", "Cunningham", { prefix : "Mr." , middle : "Appleton" }) I like having the extra lambda list features available in my own code. Should we add this to Parenscript? -Red

3 4

[parenscript-devel] Feature proposal: (defun (setf... and defsetf
by Vladimir Sedach 02 Aug '07

02 Aug '07

Another feature I'm planning to add are setf expanders for ParenScript. This should eliminate the need for explicitly name-mangling complex accessor function names like set-this and set-that, etc., which will make ParenScript code generation much easier, but at the same time generate those name mangled functions in the generated Javascript code itself, which will aid in debugging code in Javascript tools such as Firebug.

1 1

[parenscript-devel] Bug: can't call ps-to-string directly
by Daniel Gackle 01 Aug '07

01 Aug '07

I believe this used to work: (ps-to-string 'some-symbol) Now it doesn't: No methods applicable for generic function #<STANDARD-GENERIC-FUNCTION PARENSCRIPT::COMPILE-PARENSCRIPT-FORM> with args (NIL SOME-SYMBOL) of classes (NULL SYMBOL) [Condition of type PROGRAM-ERROR] ... apparently because of the lack of an implicitly expected compilation environment. Dan

3 6

[parenscript-devel] Null macro
by Daniel Gackle 31 Jul '07

31 Jul '07

Can't find anything in Parenscript to do this... should we add it? (defpsmacro null (x) `(= ,x nil)) Daniel

3 2

[parenscript-devel] *enable-package-system* and backward compatibility in general
by Attila Lendvai 31 Jul '07

31 Jul '07

hi! i've tried to update ucw to the new parenscript repo, but it turned out to be more headache then what i want to address right now. i've seen that a new naming convention is used instead of some old api functions. is there a chance of leaving the old api and keeping it backward compatible? specifically js:js* and friends should bind *enable-package-system* to false somewhere, and things like that. globally changing *enable-package-system* before loading ucw is a really bad idea, but ucw calls parenscript even at compile time, so rebinding *enable-package-system* by ucw when serving a request is also not working. i've pushed some unimportant changes in the process, though. -- attila

2 1

[parenscript-devel] Bug: renamed symbols weren't exported
by Daniel Gackle 31 Jul '07

31 Jul '07

Attached is a small patch to correct the fact that some symbols weren't renamed in package.lisp. Dan

2 1

[parenscript-devel] I like the deprecated names better
by Daniel Gackle 30 Jul '07

30 Jul '07

I agree with renaming Parenscript's package from :js to :parenscript or :ps. Indeed, just :parenscript would be fine. A library and its package should usually have the same name. However, some of the function and macro names that Parenscript now complains are deprecated, I actually prefer to their replacements. For example, the js macro is accurately named. I prefer this: (js (setf x 1)) to this: (ps (setf x 1)) ...because "js" reminds me that I'm generating Javascript (not Parenscript). To me it's closer to the meaning. What I especially don't like, though, is this: (script (setf x 1)) ... because there are at least two other scripting languages embedded in my Lisp code, and the term "script" could apply to any of them. I need to know at all times which kind of script I'm working with. In this case it's Javascript. Similarly, I much prefer "defjsmacro" to "defscriptmacro". Much clearer and more expressive. There's sort of a philosophical point here. I don't see Parenscript as a separate language. I see it as an interface to Javascript. I don't want an extra mental layer getting in the way, and I certainly don't want to forget that I'm writing Javascript. (I love using macros to build up abstractions in Parenscript - in fact that's a big reason I use PS - but to me that's a separate issue.) Bottom line, I have a moderate preference for "js" names instead of "ps" ones and a strong objection to the generic term "script". What do others think? Daniel

3 3

[parenscript-devel] Bug in latest release: js* doesn't append semicolon or accept list anymore
by Daniel Gackle 30 Jul '07

30 Jul '07

Upgrading to the latest PS in darcs broke some of my code. Specifically, (js* '(setf x 1)) => "x = 1" ... should have a semicolon but doesn't. Also, (js* '(setf x 1) '(setf y 2)) => "y = 2" ... should be "x = 1; y = 2;". Dan p.s. I see that js* has been deprecated in favor of ps*... I'll post separately about this.

2 1

[parenscript-devel] problem with princ in html
by Peter Koeleman 30 Jul '07

30 Jul '07

Hi everybody, I've been trying to run the tutorials for parenscript and installed parenscript with sbcl and aserve on a Gentoo machine. There is a problem when trying to use parenscript. The html function/macro isn't working. Somehow the common-lisp package get's out of use and princ is undefined. The error message that I get is: * 5-aserve-worker: 07/27/07 - 10:05:01 - while processing command "GET /tutorial3.js HTTP/1.1" got error The function :PRINC is undefined. Some of the warnings I get after loading some code from the tutorial: ; in: LAMBDA NIL ; JS:JS-FILE ; ==> ; (JS:HTML ; (:PRINC ; (JS:JS ; (DEFUN JS-TUTORIAL::GREETING-CALLBACK () ; (JS-TUTORIAL::ALERT "Hello World"))))) ; ; caught STYLE-WARNING: ; undefined function: HTML ; --> JS:HTML ; ==> ; (:PRINC ; (JS:JS ; (DEFUN JS-TUTORIAL::GREETING-CALLBACK () ; (JS-TUTORIAL::ALERT "Hello World")))) ; ; caught STYLE-WARNING: ; undefined function: :PRINC ; ; caught STYLE-WARNING: ; These functions are undefined: ; HTML :PRINC Is this a known problem? It seems that it all breaks out of the box. Please let me know if there is a workaround or bugfix. Peter Koeleman

2 1

[parenscript-devel] Bug: string literals don't self-evaluate in js macros
by Daniel Gackle 30 Jul '07

30 Jul '07

A js macro that evaluates to a string literal can't be used: (defjsmacro blah () "abc") (js (blah)) => "null;" This seems wrong. For one thing, other literals work fine: (defjsmacro blah () 123) (js (blah)) => "123" For another, Lisp behaves differently: (defmacro blah () "abc") (blah) => "abc" Dan p.s. Actually, I'd rather use a symbol macro but it appears there is no define-symbol-macro in Parenscript and in this case symbol-macrolet is not convenient.

3 2

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

parenscript-devel July 2007