←back to thread

88 points azhenley | 7 comments | | HN request time: 0.834s | source | bottom
1. maplant ◴[] No.45153371[source]
This isn't specific to racket, any implementation of R6RS scheme should fully support this, although the define-syntax form is slightly different.

I checked this with my R6RS implementation and it works just as you would expect (https://github.com/maplant/scheme-rs)

replies(3): >>45153752 #>>45153767 #>>45154218 #
2. valorzard ◴[] No.45153752[source]
How close are you to getting a "full" implementation of R6RS? I've been thinking of picking either your project or Steel[0] for a Rust Scheme thing

[0] https://github.com/mattwparas/steel

replies(1): >>45153891 #
3. ◴[] No.45153767[source]
4. maplant ◴[] No.45153891[source]
I’m hoping by the end of the year. All of the “difficult” things are finished (control flow, syntax transformers, call/cc, dynamic wind, exceptions, libraries, etc) and it’s just a matter of filling missing base library functions. If there’s something in particular that you need you’re welcome to file and issue or post a message on the discord and I’ll prioritize it.

That being said, Steel is excellent and I highly recommend it if you just need R5RS with syntax transformers

5. skrishnamurthi ◴[] No.45154218[source]
Wow — scheme-rs is such a neat project! Hadn't heard of it before!
replies(1): >>45154897 #
6. maplant ◴[] No.45154897[source]
Thanks! I haven’t really publicized it, my goal is to get it finished first, but I will be presenting on it at the scheme workshop at ICFP/SPLASH
replies(1): >>45158598 #
7. skrishnamurthi ◴[] No.45158598{3}[source]
Neat! Will see if I can make it (though I'll probably have to be dealing with OOPSLA stuff at the same time )-:).