Re: QuasiQuoting for declarations

Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:=0A=0A> Meanwhile, I gather you are using quasi-qu=
otes.  I=E2=80=99m interested=0A> to know about applications: what are you =
using it for?=0A=0A(I assume this was a general query, hence my reply...)=
=0A=0AI'm using it in testing... I have written an an interpreter for a (C-=
like) language, and quasi-quotation makes the tests for the interpreter rea=
d very nicely -- I express a short program in the 'native' language syntax =
(within a quasi-quotation), and then a few lines of Haskell defining the ex=
pected behavior of the program.  Without quasiquotation, I'd either have to=
 store the 'native' programs in separate files or build them up as strings =
(which means, in either case, I could get the syntax wrong and not know it =
until I run the tests.  And the tests are harder to read).  It was close to=
 zero work to create the quasi-quoter, since I already had the parser handy=
.  (I did have to enhance it to handle antiquotation, which I needed to mak=
e the tests easier to write).=0A=0AI've visions of using the same technique=
 for expressing tests (queries and expected replies) in the native syntax o=
f a particular server I'm involved in developing, but have not done so yet.=
=0A=0ARob=0A=0A=0A=0A