Simplify form building about congame HOT 2 CLOSED

To give an idea, compare the below syntax for defining a question with answers from 1 to 5 versus the current versions (see here]. The improvement in this case is only that

• there is no need to keep the form* and rw parts in synch
• there is no need for the rendering boilerplate (as long as one is happy to use the defaults)
• the bots' behavior can be defined at the site where such behavior is easy to understand, and in a way that can be used both for marionette-driven bots or direct-request bots.

From the survey perspective, the question, possible answers, correct and wrong answer (if applicable) should all be defined in one place. And various answers should be defined as parameters for a bot, including defaults. E.g.:

(make-question clear-instructions?
               #:question "How clear were the instructions of the study on a scale from 1 (very unclear) to 5 (very clear)?"
               ;; Provide exhaustive options or contract or set of predicates? Essentially validators.
               #:answers (in-range 1 5 1)
               ;; There may be a need for an additional category of validators, i.e. ensuring some answers jointly satisfy a property, so maybe #:answers isn't really like validators.
               #:bots (hash 'unclear 2
                            'clear   4))
; In study, pick default bot
; ...
(make-step 'survey ; has multiple questions
           survey-handler
           transition
           #:for-bot (hash 'clear-instructions? 'unclear
                           'other-question 'other-answer'))
; Or to make a custom bot
(define custom-bot-for-survey
  (make-bot (hash 'clear-instructions? 'clear)) ; Rest is set to default values

; Or if an answer was not yet named, can provide here the answer
(define custom-bot-thinks-really-unclear-survey
  (make-bot (hash 'clear-instructions? 1)))

The names on inputs are hooks for the bots, if we want hooks for other behaviors we might want to generalize things. E.g. if someone is going to use javascript for some interaction, or for clicking on links.

@Bogdanp : There are a few moving parts to this (defining helper functions/macros to reduce boiler-plate, integrate with bots). For the bot part, we should play around with the bot-models a bit more to get a feel for them; for the syntax, it all depends how easy you believe it will be to have some sugar for the common form input types.

from congame.

Implemented by f2916bd.

from congame.