jackfirth / jackfirth/resyntax
Stop relying on `syntax-original?`
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Racket
- Stars
- 70
- Forks
- 11
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
It's brittle and doesn't quite mean what I intend. Really what I'm looking for is a way to check that a syntax object came directly from the output of source-read-syntax. I think I can solve that by adding an interned scope to the output of source-read-syntax, or something like that.
Fixing this would make it possible for refactoring rules to operate on the whole (module ...) form produced by the reader.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reading how syntax-original? is used and how source-read-syntax produces syntax objects. Investigate whether an interned scope can identify syntax directly returned by source-read-syntax, then verify that refactoring rules can operate on the whole (module ...) form.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- tooling
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100