racket/collects/unstable/struct.ss
Eli Barzilay e34e001167 comments
svn: r16704
2009-11-12 00:18:08 +00:00

66 lines
2.7 KiB
Scheme

#lang scheme/base
;; owner: ryanc
(require (for-syntax scheme/base
scheme/struct-info))
(provide make
struct->list)
;; (make struct-name field-expr ...)
;; Checks that correct number of fields given.
(define-syntax (make stx)
(define (bad-struct-name x)
(raise-syntax-error #f "expected struct name" stx x))
(define (get-struct-info id)
(unless (identifier? id)
(bad-struct-name id))
(let ([value (syntax-local-value id (lambda () #f))])
(unless (struct-info? value)
(bad-struct-name id))
(extract-struct-info value)))
(syntax-case stx ()
[(make S expr ...)
(let ()
(define info (get-struct-info #'S))
(define constructor (list-ref info 1))
(define accessors (list-ref info 3))
(unless (identifier? #'constructor)
(raise-syntax-error #f "constructor not available for struct" stx #'S))
(unless (andmap identifier? accessors)
(raise-syntax-error #f "incomplete info for struct type" stx #'S))
(let ([num-slots (length accessors)]
[num-provided (length (syntax->list #'(expr ...)))])
(unless (= num-provided num-slots)
(raise-syntax-error
#f
(format "wrong number of arguments for struct ~s (expected ~s)"
(syntax-e #'S)
num-slots)
stx)))
(with-syntax ([constructor constructor])
(syntax-property #'(constructor expr ...)
'disappeared-use
#'S)))]))
;; Eli: You give a good point for this, but I'd prefer if the optimizer would
;; detect these, so you'd get the same warnings for constructors too when you
;; use `-W warning'. (And then, if you really want these things to be
;; errors, then perhaps something at the mzscheme level should make it throw
;; errors instead of warnings.)
(define dummy-value (box 'dummy))
;; struct->list : struct? #:false-on-opaque? bool -> (listof any/c)
(define (struct->list s #:false-on-opaque? [false-on-opaque? #f])
(let ([vec (struct->vector s dummy-value)])
(and (for/and ([elem (in-vector vec)])
(cond [(eq? elem dummy-value)
(unless false-on-opaque?
(raise-type-error 'struct->list "non-opaque struct" s))
#f]
[else #t]))
(cdr (vector->list vec)))))
;; Eli: Why is there that `false-on-opaque?' business instead of having
;; an interface similar to `struct->vector'? I'd prefer an optional
;; on-opaque value, and have it throw an error if it's opaque and no
;; value is given. Also, `gensym' seems much better to me than a box
;; for a unique value.