[racket] bracket conversion?

I agree with John that even if pathological cases are not handled, that'd be fairly helpful. 

I'm done with my manual porting of OOPLAI though, and thanks to the C-c C-[ shortcut, it was not that terrible. 

My $2 (<- chilean pesos) report is that:
- most of it was converting `let' and friends (many of which are multi-lines), as well as `cond' and `case'
- a bit of PLAI's define-type / type-case
- the other big part of it was about custom macros 
(eg. the OBJECT or CLASS macros that the text is about; in these cases the rules of which parenthesis should be squared could even be taken directly from the define-syntax definition (?))

-- Éric


On Nov 20, 2012, at 8:59 PM, John Clements wrote:

> 
> On Nov 20, 2012, at 3:53 PM, Robby Findler wrote:
> 
>> I think one way to do it would be to use read-syntax to get the
>> expression, but then also put the file into a string. Walk the
>> expression and look for patterns that you want to change rounds to
>> squares and then mutate the string and write the file back out again.
>> Use the position field of the syntax object to tell you where to
>> mutate the string.
> 
> Yep, that's exactly what I was thinking.
> 
>> 
>> You could even take a check-syntax like approach (it is more complex,
>> tho) and fully expand the program. Then, when you find 'cond' in the
>> origin field of some syntax object you can be sure it really is
>> racket/base's cond and not some other thing like, eg
>> 
>> (lambda (cond) (cond 3 (+ 1 2)))
> 
> I think this would wind up being nearly impossible. I think the first one could be occasionally incorrect (e.g. someone re-binds the identifier 'new', and then what look like initialization clauses should be treated as applications), but that seems like a small price to pay for the massive simplification.
> 
> My guess: the whole thing would take about three days of work.
> 
> John
> 
> 
>> 
>> Robby
>> 
>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 5:09 PM, John Clements
>> <clements at brinckerhoff.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Nov 20, 2012, at 11:28 AM, Eric Tanter wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Thanks John, that's very helpful!
>>>> 
>>>> Any idea about a whole-file racketify in DrRacket?
>>> 
>>> That's a toughy. What you want is to be able to invert (read-syntax). It seems to me that such a thing should be possible in many of the racket languages, but I'm not aware of an implementation.
>>> 
>>> Actually, thinking about it harder, I suppose you have the original string text of the file, as well, so that makes it a hugely easier; you just need a predicate on the (un-expanded) syntax objects that can tell you whether a syntax list should have square or round brackets.
>>> 
>>> So, here's the $64K question: can you specify precisely which places need to be changed? If so, it sounds like this is do-able.
>>> 
>>> John
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -- Éric
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Nov 20, 2012, at 3:16 PM, John Clements wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Nov 20, 2012, at 10:01 AM, Eric Tanter wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'm converting code written with only standard parentheses, introducing squared ones where appropriate.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> This is obviously not very fun (I'm converting all of OOPLAI), and it would be great if there'd be a way to select an open paren and "convert" it so that the matching closing paren is changed automatically.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Is this feasible?
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm pretty sure Sam and I added this binding last year. C-c C-[ ? I think you can look it up in the keybindings.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> John
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ____________________
>>> Racket Users list:
>>> http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
>>> 
>