I would say not to implement this just on my behalf. I think it would be weird for pattern variables to act differently if they came from syntax-parse versus from with-syntax.
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 2:17 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <sa...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: > On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Ryan Culpepper <ry...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: >> >> Note, however, that the syntax class now uses #:attr instead of #:with. >> That's the main usability issue I'm worried about with this change. >> Following with-syntax's lead, a #:with clause automatically converts its >> right-hand side to syntax---even if the result is "3D". That means that if >> you forget that step of the conversion to laziness, you'll probably get >> bizarre 3D syntax. I could change #:with to raise an error in some/all 3D >> cases, but that might break existing programs. >> >> Is anyone out there using syntax-parse to make 3D syntax? > > I'm sure all the places where I do this are bugs (and it has happened > to me), so I'd welcome this error. > > Sam ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
