> On Oct 19, 2016, at 4:06 AM, Robby Findler <ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu> > wrote: > > That's the best approach we currently have. Of course, we could support a new > property that was "connect srclocs" or something.
Do you think it would make sense to have a property that uses bound-identifier=? rather than free-identifier=? to connect identifiers? Managing scopes seems a bit more feasible to do procedurally than managing bindings (since you can use make-syntax-introducer to explicitly add them), but I’m not sure if that would be much better than a “connect srclocs” option. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
