Rob Browning wrote:
Neil Jerram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
FWIW, I agree. In 1.7.x I believe we have more of the infrastructure
in place to get this right - by which I mean to signal an error if a
macro is passed in this way. But (having just tried your tests out on
1.7.x) it's not doing this just yet.
I haven't considered it carefully yet, but if fold's only supposed to
take a procedure for kons, then why not just add a check-arg-type
procedure? call for kons?
We could certainly do this, but I think I remember a thread where it was
suggested that we treat any occurrence of a macro in non-car position as
an error - which would catch the problem more generally. Am I
completely imagining this?
Neil
_______________________________________________
Guile-user mailing list
Guile-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user
