Thanks for the report; fixed! On Thu 29 Apr 2021 12:48, Stefan Israelsson Tampe <stefan.ita...@gmail.com> writes:
> Here is an interesting test case that shows that fi we define > (define-syntax-rule (letec-m f) (let/ec c (f c))) > (define (letec-f f) (let/ec c (f c))) > > we can get two different behaviors with letec-m compiles wrongly. Obviously a > bug! > > This is important in casy you would like to make a loop macro effectively > with a continue directive.
