September 2009 - parenscript-devel - mailman3.common-lisp.net

[parenscript-devel] New Parenscript release.
by Vladimir Sedach 10 Oct '09

10 Oct '09

Hello, A new version of Parenscript has been released. This release comes with partial support for LOOP and DESTRUCTURING-BIND Common Lisp facilities (thanks to the efforts of Daniel Gackle and Scott Bell), much faster compilation speed, many bugfixes, real and efficient lexical scoping for all special forms that introduce bindings, as well as the ability to direct compiler output directly to a stream. One thing that has been removed is support for the dot symbol notation (ie - 'object.property' would be special cased into (slot-value object 'property) by the compiler) - this has been done to allow Parenscript code to be a useful target for code walkers designed for regular Lisp code. The consequence is that any code that relies on the dot notation will need to be changed to use non-opaque object slot access. Thank you, Vladimir

7 19

[parenscript-devel] Reimplementing (.method object ...) syntax
by Clinton Ebadi 07 Oct '09

07 Oct '09

Greetings, I recently upgraded parenscript after a few months and was disheartened to see that (.method ...) syntax was removed (and to a lesser extent foo.bar and foo[bar] syntax). I read the mailing list threads pertaining to the new lexical let implementation and compiler improvements, but after skimming the source code I don't see why (.method ...) could not be supported. As such I have started a symbol-syntax branch at [0]. In particular I have done a first stab at reimplementing the (.method ...) syntax in the patch viewable at [1]. I do not yet have a grasp of the subtleties in the new compiler, but I think the patch looks basically correct. I figured you guys could tell me if I missed anything. Are there any objections to the patch? I've found that (funcall (@ foo bar) ...) and (chain foo bar (baz ...)) syntax to be fairly unwieldy for something as common as a method call, and don't see why (.method ...) should not be considered a fundamental syntax of parenscript (parenscript is parenscript and not lisp; enforcing consistency with lisp syntax at the expense of conciseness is not desirable in my opinion). I'll probably reimplement foo.bar.baz syntax properly (by splitting the symbol apart and translating to nested (js:slot-value ...) nodes?). I'm not convinced that it is worth having foo[bar] syntax however (but drewc disagrees so I may reimplement it anyway for our use in ucw/lisp-on-lines). Is there anything fundamentally preventing this from working properly (in the face of symbol renaming and such)? [0] git://git.hcoop.net/git/clinton/parenscript.git [1] http://git.hcoop.net/?p=clinton/parenscript.git;a=commitdiff;h=18eb19984154… -- Jessie: but today i was a nerd Jessie: i even read slashdot.

2 2

[parenscript-devel] Parenscript release candidate.
by Vladimir Sedach 18 Sep '09

18 Sep '09

Hi everybody, I just pushed a bunch of patches greatly improving Parenscript compilation performance, and adding the ability to print Parenscript output directly to a stream. I think it's time to make a release. Please check out the latest version from the git repository and see if everything works as expected. If there aren't any bug reports by Sept. 18, I am going to make a new release. Thank you, Vladimir

2 5

[parenscript-devel] [PATCH] Extend CHAIN to support slot-values
by Daniel White 13 Sep '09

13 Sep '09

For example: (chain ($ "foo") (bar x z) frob (baz 5) => $('foo').bar(x, z).frob.baz(5); --- src/lib/ps-macro-lib.lisp | 4 +++- 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/lib/ps-macro-lib.lisp b/src/lib/ps-macro-lib.lisp index be90b79..2ef7d82 100644 --- a/src/lib/ps-macro-lib.lisp +++ b/src/lib/ps-macro-lib.lisp @@ -84,7 +84,9 @@ (defpsmacro chain (&rest method-calls) (labels ((do-chain (method-calls) (if (cdr method-calls) - `((@ ,(do-chain (cdr method-calls)) ,(caar method-calls)) ,@(cdar method-calls)) + (if (listp (car method-calls)) + `((@ ,(do-chain (cdr method-calls)) ,(caar method-calls)) ,@(cdar method-calls)) + `(@ ,(do-chain (cdr method-calls)) ,(car method-calls))) (car method-calls)))) (do-chain (reverse method-calls)))) -- 1.6.4.2

2 1