Request for feedback: deriving strategies syntax

[Kosyrev Serge]

Kosyrev Serge <_deepfire at feelingofgreen.ru> writes:
> How much of this derivation machinery could NOT be implemented by means of
> some kind of a (hypothetical) type-backed metaprogramming facility?
>
> The beauty of an open implementation[1] allowed by such a thing is that:

I apologize for the unfortunate metacircular logic in the below passage:

>   1. uniformity of definition of the desugaring transformation
>      would have followed, and from that:
>
>      - the "bespoke" derivation mechanism will suddenly become
>        explainable in a language shared by all derivation mechanisms:
>
>        - the separate derivation strategies as separate, named macro
>          transformations, using a common library of type-level and other
>          tools -- mostly those already in existence
>        - the combined strategy as an overarching macro tranformation

It should instead read as:

   1. uniformity of expression of the desugaring transformation
      would have followed, in the following way:

      - the overall derivation mechanism is to become expressible
        through the following composition:

        - the separate derivation strategies are to become separate,
          named macro transformations, using a common library of
          type-level and other tools -- mostly those already in
          existence

          - this aforementioned common library is explicitly required to
            be sufficiently powerful to able to express the "bespoke"
            derivation mechanism

        - the combined strategy as an overarching macro tranformation

The rest stands as is:

>  2. because of above, we get a starting point from which we can
>     evolve something that can be meaningfully standartized, without a
>     feeling of shame or guilt -- we now have a language describing the
>     problem domain, that can be un-tied from a particular implementation
>
>  3. in-editor macroexpansion is a proven, working concept in the realm
>     of Proper Metaprogramming (viz. Common Lisp etc.), and it would
>     basically eliminate guesswork from user workflows
>
>  ..or is this all a violent pipe dream?

-- 
с уважениeм / respectfully,
Косырев Сергей