[plt-scheme] Inadequate indentation facility in MrEd/DrScheme

From: James Russell (j.russell at alum.mit.edu)
Date: Wed Jun 18 23:48:56 EDT 2008

On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 11:32 PM, Shriram Krishnamurthi <sk at cs.brown.edu> wrote:
> You mean as opposed to the indentation customization options?

Well, either in addition to or instead of, unless I've missed something obvious.

My, admittedly cursory, inspection of framework/private/scheme.ss
suggests that the indenting framework is pretty rigid and doesn't
handle something like 'for/fold' that should have two distinguished
forms followed by body forms.

If this is the case then it seems that something more radical needs to be done.

> Shriram
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 10:58 PM, James Russell <j.russell at alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> Are there any plans to overhaul the built-in indentation facility in
>> MrEd/DrScheme, perhaps providing more flexible customization
>> alternatives?
>> At this point it seems manifestly inadequate, in that there is no way
>> to make it correctly indent what are now standard syntactic forms,
>> like (the immensely cool) 'for/fold'; where 'correctly' is defined
>> either by 'how it's done in the manual', or 'what a lisp person might
>> expect'.
>> The situation is, of course, just as bad for any macros that I might
>> care to define that don't fit the begin/define/lambda indentation
>> patterns.
>> And, yes, I can just use emacs, but that's not really the point.
>> -James Russell
>> _________________________________________________
>>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>>  http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme

"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of
the human mind to correlate all its contents." -- H.P.Lovecraft

Posted on the users mailing list.