parenscript this.bgcolor
in [Lisp]
|
From: Olof-Joachim Frahm on 20 Jun 2010 22:55 Jorge Gajon <gajon(a)gajon.org> writes: > I still have one question though; I couldn't get `ps-inline` to work > with a very simple example: > > The variable PARENSCRIPT::COMPILE-EXPRESSION? is unbound. Seems like I had a local fix for that, instead of PS-COMPILE it should be COMPILE-STATEMENT in the file compilation-interface.lisp: > (defmacro+ps ps-inline (form &optional (string-delimiter *js-inline-string-delimiter*)) > `(concatenate 'string "javascript:" > ,@(let ((*js-string-delimiter* string-delimiter)) > (parenscript-print (compile-statement form) nil)))) hth -- The world is burning. Run.
From: Kenneth Tilton on 20 Jun 2010 23:07 Jorge Gajon wrote: > I found this a little bit surprising. It should be easier to use > parenscript without importing all its symbols. And ideally one should not have to load it or call any of its functions or even be aware that it exists or that you intend to use it. kt -- http://www.stuckonalgebra.com "The best Algebra tutorial program I have seen... in a class by itself." Macworld
From: Jorge Gajon on 21 Jun 2010 00:55 On 2010-06-21, Kenneth Tilton <kentilton(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Jorge Gajon wrote: >> I found this a little bit surprising. It should be easier to use >> parenscript without importing all its symbols. > > And ideally one should not have to load it or call any of its functions > or even be aware that it exists or that you intend to use it. > Yes that would be nice too. But what I meant was that I was expecting (parenscript:ps (whatever...)) to treat ANY symbol - regardless of its home package - with name "@" inside (whatever...) according to the rules described in parenscript's documentation. But I was also expecting to rule the world by now. Those bastards!!
From: Jorge Gajon on 21 Jun 2010 01:07 On 2010-06-21, Olof-Joachim Frahm <Olof.Frahm(a)web.de> wrote: > Jorge Gajon <gajon(a)gajon.org> writes: > >> I still have one question though; I couldn't get `ps-inline` to work >> with a very simple example: >> >> The variable PARENSCRIPT::COMPILE-EXPRESSION? is unbound. > > Seems like I had a local fix for that, instead of PS-COMPILE it should > be COMPILE-STATEMENT in the file compilation-interface.lisp: > >> (defmacro+ps ps-inline (form &optional (string-delimiter *js-inline-string-delimiter*)) >> `(concatenate 'string "javascript:" >> ,@(let ((*js-string-delimiter* string-delimiter)) >> (parenscript-print (compile-statement form) nil)))) > Thank you Olof, I've created a patch for my local copy.
From: Kenneth Tilton on 21 Jun 2010 02:25
Jorge Gajon wrote: > On 2010-06-21, Kenneth Tilton <kentilton(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> Jorge Gajon wrote: >>> I found this a little bit surprising. It should be easier to use >>> parenscript without importing all its symbols. >> And ideally one should not have to load it or call any of its functions >> or even be aware that it exists or that you intend to use it. >> > > Yes that would be nice too. But what I meant was that I was expecting > (parenscript:ps (whatever...)) to treat ANY symbol - regardless of its > home package - with name "@" inside (whatever...) according to the rules > described in parenscript's documentation. > > But I was also expecting to rule the world by now. > Those bastards!! > > Sorry? We put you in charge back in '96. You didn't know?... This could explain a lot. kt -- http://www.stuckonalgebra.com "The best Algebra tutorial program I have seen... in a class by itself." Macworld |