-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 96
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Automated Resyntax fixes #461
Open
resyntax-ci
wants to merge
9
commits into
master
Choose a base branch
from
autofix-10-1
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
9 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
6f2fc0b
Fix 9 occurrences of `tidy-require`
resyntax-ci[bot] fb36760
Fix 1 occurrence of `let-to-define`
resyntax-ci[bot] 4d76267
Fix 3 occurrences of `map-to-for`
resyntax-ci[bot] 1f31da8
Fix 1 occurrence of `define-syntax-syntax-rules-to-define-syntax-rule`
resyntax-ci[bot] 6e2f512
Fix 1 occurrence of `if-let-to-cond`
resyntax-ci[bot] 2b41215
Fix 1 occurrence of `cond-let-to-cond-define`
resyntax-ci[bot] 664b06a
Fix 1 occurrence of `ormap-to-for/or`
resyntax-ci[bot] d16df82
Fix 2 occurrences of `if-begin-to-cond`
resyntax-ci[bot] 733699e
Fix 1 occurrence of `when-expression-in-for-loop-to-when-keyword`
resyntax-ci[bot] File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@jackfirth I'd rather see
here.
In general, I think quasiquote should only be preserved if there exists an item that is not unquote / unquote-splicing. If all of them are unquote / unquote-splicing, either it should be converted to a
list
or anappend
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'd use a different rule for this. If I'm thinking of it as an sexpression, I'd use quasiquote and friends; if I'm thinking of it as a list, I'd use append and friends.
So maybe the quasiquote should be preserved by the tool and a user should make this judgment?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it's pretty fuzzy in a lot of cases, so Resyntax is conservative and only takes a hard stance on the cases that seem clearly absurd to me like this:
`(,a ,b ,c) ; just write `(list ...)` man, you're not fooling anyone
In the code you commented on, I would also prefer to avoid quotation for the same reason as you. But I dislike datum quotations generally and that's a much stronger stance than many Racketeers. So I don't think Resyntax should actively discourage it.