From: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>
To: Atharva Raykar <raykar.ath@gmail.com>
Cc: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>,
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GSOC][PATCH] userdiff: add support for Scheme
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 14:56:36 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <874kgsn6kb.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <59DFC82F-A3EA-4637-94AE-4042697448FF@gmail.com>
On Tue, Mar 30 2021, Atharva Raykar wrote:
> On 29-Mar-2021, at 15:38, Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 28/03/2021 13:40, Atharva Raykar wrote:
>>> On 28-Mar-2021, at 08:46, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> 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.
>
> Yes, this is the part that is hard for me to figure out. I am going by
> two heuristics: what Scheme communities in other places would generally
> prefer, and what patterns I see happen more often in scheme code.
>
> The former is tricky to do. I posted to a few mailing lists about this,
> but they don't seem active enough to garner any responses.
>
> The latter is a little easier to measure quickly. I did a GitHub search,
> where I filtered results to only consider Scheme files (language:scheme).
>
> Some armchair stats, just for a broad understanding:
>
> Total number of scheme files: 529,339
> No. of times a construct is used in those files:
> define and its variants : 431,090 (81.4%)
> def and its variants : 18,466 ( 3.5%)
> eval-when : 3,375 ( 0.6%)
>
> There was no way for me to quickly know which of these uses are at the top
> level, but either way of the more structural forms that do show up in Scheme
> code, define and its variants seem like a clear winner. I am not sure if
> it's worth adding more rules to check for def and its variants, given that
> they are not nearly as common.
In those cases we should veer on the side of inclusion. The only problem
we'll have is if "eval-when" is a "setq"-like function top-level form in
some other scheme dialect, so we'll have a conflict.
Otherwise it's fine, programs that only use "define" won't be bothered
by an eval-when rule.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-30 12:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-27 17:39 [GSOC][PATCH] userdiff: add support for Scheme Atharva Raykar
2021-03-27 22:50 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-03-27 23:09 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-03-28 3:16 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-03-28 5:37 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-03-28 12:40 ` Atharva Raykar
2021-03-29 10:08 ` Phillip Wood
2021-03-30 6:41 ` Atharva Raykar
2021-03-30 12:56 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason [this message]
2021-03-30 13:48 ` Atharva Raykar
2021-03-28 12:45 ` Atharva Raykar
2021-03-28 11:51 ` Atharva Raykar
2021-03-28 18:06 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-03-29 8:12 ` Atharva Raykar
2021-03-29 20:47 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-03-29 10:12 ` Phillip Wood
2021-03-27 23:46 ` Johannes Sixt
2021-03-28 12:23 ` Atharva Raykar
2021-03-29 10:18 ` Phillip Wood
2021-03-29 10:48 ` Johannes Sixt
2021-03-29 13:12 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-03-29 14:06 ` Phillip Wood
2021-03-30 7:04 ` Atharva Raykar
2021-03-30 10:22 ` Atharva Raykar
2021-04-05 10:04 ` Phillip Wood
2021-04-05 17:58 ` Johannes Sixt
2021-04-06 12:29 ` Atharva Raykar
2021-04-06 19:10 ` Phillip Wood
2021-04-03 13:16 ` [GSoC][PATCH v2 0/1] userdiff: add support for scheme Atharva Raykar
2021-04-03 13:16 ` [GSoC][PATCH v2 1/1] " Atharva Raykar
2021-04-05 10:21 ` Phillip Wood
2021-04-06 10:32 ` Atharva Raykar
2021-04-08 9:14 ` [GSoC][PATCH v3 0/1] " Atharva Raykar
2021-04-08 9:14 ` [GSoC][PATCH v3 1/1] userdiff: add support for Scheme Atharva Raykar
2021-04-12 23:04 ` Junio C Hamano
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:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=874kgsn6kb.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com \
--to=avarab@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=phillip.wood123@gmail.com \
--cc=raykar.ath@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* 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 NNTP newsgroup(s).