[plt-scheme] macros that expand into top-level definitions with computed names

Do you mean this kind of thing:

#lang scheme

(define-syntax (def stx)
   (syntax-case stx ()
     [(_ f x body ...)
      (identifier? (syntax f))
      (let* ([f:sym (syntax-e (syntax f))]
             [my-f:str (string-append "my-" (symbol->string f:sym))]
             [my-f:sym (string->symbol my-f:str)]
             [my-f:id (datum->syntax stx my-f:sym)])
        #`(define #,my-f:id (lambda (x) body ...)))]))

(def yours x (sqrt x))

(my-yours 4)

I recommend creating a module in your personal collects that provides  
for adding prefixes and suffixes and importing it when needed. It's  
in my standard collection

-- Matthias



On Aug 11, 2009, at 9:31 PM, Lee Spector wrote:

>
> I'm still transitioning from Common Lisp (thanks for all of the  
> pointers so far) and I'm having trouble doing something that I  
> could easily do with a CL macro.
>
> I'd like to write a macro (or whatever) that takes two strings and  
> defines a function named with the symbol formed from interning the  
> concatenation of the strings. For example if the arguments have the  
> values "my-" and "function" in a particular call then I'd like the  
> effect of the call to be the same as something like (define my- 
> function <more stuff here>).
>
> This is straightforward using defmacro in CL, but looking through  
> the section of the PLT reference on macros I don't see where to  
> start.  In CL if I didn't know about defmacro, and if I didn't mind  
> having my definitions evaluated in a null lexical environment, then  
> I could hack it with eval. So with my new (but still minimal)  
> understanding of eval and namespaces in PLT I tried this:
>
> -------
> #lang scheme
>
> (define-namespace-anchor nsa)
> (define ns (namespace-anchor->namespace nsa))
>
> (eval `(define ,(string->symbol (string-append "my-" "function"))
>               (lambda () 'runs))
>       ns)
>
> (my-function)
> -------
>
> This doesn't work -- expand: unbound identifier in module in: my- 
> function -- although if I get rid of the call to my-function in the  
> definitions pane then it does compile and allow me to call my- 
> function (which then does the right thing) in the interactions  
> pane. But that's not good enough for my purposes.
>
> Of course this hack with eval is probably the wrong approach anyway  
> -- it would be a bad way to do it in CL and I'm guessing that a  
> completely different approach would be appropriate in PLT. And I  
> think I'm just not seeing the right part of the PLT docs because of  
> the differences in terminology.
>
> Can someone point me in the right direction on this?
>
> Thanks,
>
>  -Lee
>
> --
> Lee Spector, Professor of Computer Science
> School of Cognitive Science, Hampshire College
> 893 West Street, Amherst, MA 01002-3359
> lspector at hampshire.edu, http://hampshire.edu/lspector/
> Phone: 413-559-5352, Fax: 413-559-5438
>
> Check out Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines:
> http://www.springer.com/10710 - http://gpemjournal.blogspot.com/
>
> _________________________________________________
>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>  http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme