Re: [PATCH] Don't mix definitions and expressions in SRFI-9

2011-03-09 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi Andreas, Andreas Rottmann writes: > l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > >> Hi, >> >> Andy Wingo writes: >> >>> On Sun 06 Mar 2011 23:26, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: >>> Andreas Rottmann writes: > The expansion of `define-inlinable' contained an expression, whic

Re: [PATCH] Don't mix definitions and expressions in SRFI-9

2011-03-07 Thread Andreas Rottmann
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > Hi, > > Andy Wingo writes: > >> On Sun 06 Mar 2011 23:26, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: >> >>> Andreas Rottmann writes: >>> The expansion of `define-inlinable' contained an expression, which made SRFI-9's `define-record-type' fail in no

Re: [PATCH] Don't mix definitions and expressions in SRFI-9

2011-03-07 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi, Andy Wingo writes: > On Sun 06 Mar 2011 23:26, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > >> Andreas Rottmann writes: >> >>> The expansion of `define-inlinable' contained an expression, which made >>> SRFI-9's `define-record-type' fail in non-toplevel contexts ("definition >>> used in express

Re: [PATCH] Don't mix definitions and expressions in SRFI-9

2011-03-07 Thread Andy Wingo
On Mon 07 Mar 2011 01:31, Andreas Rottmann writes: > I have a testing framework (built upon Riastradh's trc-testing), which > uses R6RS `eval' to load testcases. Since `eval' does not allow for > the code to be evaluated to be in a top-level context, I'm using this: > > (eval `(let () ,@code-to-

Re: [PATCH] Don't mix definitions and expressions in SRFI-9

2011-03-07 Thread Andy Wingo
On Sun 06 Mar 2011 23:26, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > Andreas Rottmann writes: > >> The expansion of `define-inlinable' contained an expression, which made >> SRFI-9's `define-record-type' fail in non-toplevel contexts ("definition >> used in expression context"). > > SRFI-9 says “Re

Re: [PATCH] Don't mix definitions and expressions in SRFI-9

2011-03-06 Thread Andreas Rottmann
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > Hi Andreas, > > Andreas Rottmann writes: > >> The expansion of `define-inlinable' contained an expression, which made >> SRFI-9's `define-record-type' fail in non-toplevel contexts ("definition >> used in expression context"). > > SRFI-9 says “Record-type

Re: [PATCH] Don't mix definitions and expressions in SRFI-9

2011-03-06 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi Alex, Alex Shinn writes: > 2011/3/7 Ludovic Courtès : >> Hi Andreas, >> >> Andreas Rottmann writes: >> >>> The expansion of `define-inlinable' contained an expression, which made >>> SRFI-9's `define-record-type' fail in non-toplevel contexts ("definition >>> used in expression context"). >>

Re: [PATCH] Don't mix definitions and expressions in SRFI-9

2011-03-06 Thread Alex Shinn
2011/3/7 Ludovic Courtès : > Hi Andreas, > > Andreas Rottmann writes: > >> The expansion of `define-inlinable' contained an expression, which made >> SRFI-9's `define-record-type' fail in non-toplevel contexts ("definition >> used in expression context"). > > SRFI-9 says “Record-type definitions m

Re: [PATCH] Don't mix definitions and expressions in SRFI-9

2011-03-06 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi Andreas, Andreas Rottmann writes: > The expansion of `define-inlinable' contained an expression, which made > SRFI-9's `define-record-type' fail in non-toplevel contexts ("definition > used in expression context"). SRFI-9 says “Record-type definitions may only occur at top-level”, and I’m in

[PATCH] Don't mix definitions and expressions in SRFI-9

2011-03-06 Thread Andreas Rottmann
As always, see the patch header for details. From: Andreas Rottmann Subject: Don't mix definitions and expressions in SRFI-9 The expansion of `define-inlinable' contained an expression, which made SRFI-9's `define-record-type' fail in non-toplevel contexts ("definition used in expression contex