[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-users] egg documentation

From: Alejandro Forero Cuervo
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] egg documentation
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 23:52:42 -0800
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)

> On 2/19/08, Jim Ursetto <address@hidden> wrote:
> > <signature type="string">doctype:xhtml-1.0-strict</signature>
> Thinking about this a little more, it strikes me that
> "definition" or "def" is probably a better tag than "signature".
> So:
> <def type="string">doctype:xhtml-1.0-strict</def>
> for unusual definitions we don't provide a built-in tag for.
> You could really replace every definition tag like this, e.g.
> <def type="macro">(receive args expr body)</def>
> however, I think providing a few specific tags like we
> discussed looks nicer.  I'll leave the verdict on that
> to the group.

Heh, this discussion is kinda similar to the Common Lisp versus Scheme
discussion of whether different namespaces should be used for
different types of things or there should be only one namespace. :-P

I think we should stick to <proc>, <macro> and so on.  They are easier
to type than <def type="proc">, <def type="macro"> and so on.  The
fact that their associated rendering logic is very similar is not

What if instead of <signature type="string"> and <def type="string">
we simply use <string>?  Would that work?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]