scsh-hackers
[Top] [All Lists]

[Scsh-hackers] [ scsh-Bugs-441953 ] let-match does not work as documente

To: noreply@sourceforge.net
Subject: [Scsh-hackers] [ scsh-Bugs-441953 ] let-match does not work as documented
From: noreply@sourceforge.net
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 02:15:47 -0700
List-id: Discussion among the implementors <scsh-hackers.lists.sourceforge.net>
Sender: scsh-hackers-admin@lists.sourceforge.net
Bugs item #441953, was opened at 2001-07-17 02:15
You can respond by visiting: 
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=110493&aid=441953&group_id=10493

Category: Documentation
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Michel Schinz (michel-schinz)
Assigned to: Olin Shivers (olin-shivers)
Summary: let-match does not work as documented

Initial Comment:
The example for the let-match function (p. 134 of the
scsh manual) is:

  (let-match (regexp-search date s)
             (whole-date month day year)
  ... body ...)

and the documentation claims that this "evaluates the
body of the let-match in a scope where whole-date is
bound to the matched string, and month, day and year
are bound to the first, second and third submatches."

However, let-match does not behave like that in 0.5.3:
the first variable is bound to the *match record* (not
the matched string as is claimed), the second to the
whole string and the next ones to the successive
sub-matches.

Therefore the documentation or the code should be fixed
so that both agree.

(Notice that if-match transitively suffers from the
same problem).

Thanks.
Michel.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=110493&aid=441953&group_id=10493


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [Scsh-hackers] [ scsh-Bugs-441953 ] let-match does not work as documented, noreply <=