Scheme language standardization process
On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 3:27 AM, Aaron W. Hsu <arcfide@x> wrote: > Alex: > >> Is there actually any implementation for which this could >> be a problem? > > Chez Scheme has this problem specifically. If you create a library that > exports a macro using an auxiliary keyword, but do not explicitly export > that keyword, then the implicit binding in the REPL is different than the > absent binding in the library, meaning that the keywords do not match, and > making the macro fail to work. On the other hand, if you use that macro in a > library where the term is unbound, then the macro will work as anticipated, > because the call site and the definition site both lack a binding for the > identifier. Is this inherent in the psyntax expander? I'd like to see the source that results in this behavior to be convinced it can't easily be fixed. -- Alex _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list Scheme-reports@x http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports