Skip to content

Conversation

@resyntax-ci
Copy link
Contributor

@resyntax-ci resyntax-ci bot commented Feb 19, 2025

Resyntax fixed 20 issues in 9 files.

  • Fixed 7 occurrences of map-to-for
  • Fixed 3 occurrences of provide/contract-to-contract-out
  • Fixed 2 occurrences of let-to-define
  • Fixed 2 occurrences of always-throwing-if-to-when
  • Fixed 1 occurrence of if-let-to-cond
  • Fixed 1 occurrence of quasiquote-to-list
  • Fixed 1 occurrence of unless-expression-in-for-loop-to-unless-keyword
  • Fixed 1 occurrence of or-hash-ref-set!-to-hash-ref!
  • Fixed 1 occurrence of string-append-and-string-join-to-string-join
  • Fixed 1 occurrence of for/fold-result-keyword

resyntax-ci bot added 10 commits February 19, 2025 00:16
`cond` with internal definitions is preferred over `if` with `let`, to reduce nesting
This `map` operation can be replaced with a `for/list` loop.
This quasiquotation is equialent to a simple `list` call.
The `provide/contract` form is a legacy form made obsolete by `contract-out`.
Using `when` and `unless` is simpler than a conditional with an always-throwing branch.
Only one of the `for/fold` expression's result values is used. Use the `#:result` keyword to return just that result.
Use the `#:unless` keyword instead of `unless` to reduce loop body indentation.
This expression can be replaced with a simpler, equivalent `hash-ref!` expression.
This use of `string-append` can be removed by using `string-join`'s keyword arguments.
Internal definitions are recommended instead of `let` expressions, to reduce nesting.
id)))
(unless b
(error 'scribble "no class/interface/mixin information for identifier: ~e" id))
(list (caddr b) (list-ref b 3) (list-ref b 4) (list-ref b 5) (list-ref b 6)))
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

A combination of take and drop would be better IMO

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Excellent idea. Added in jackfirth/resyntax#444.

@mflatt
Copy link
Member

mflatt commented Jun 26, 2025

Conflicts with newer merges.

@mflatt mflatt closed this Jun 26, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants