It turned out, that the above solution doesn't work
exactly as expected -- since the scopes of "private"
and "interface" get separated (by the with-syntax
form that I have been so proud of), it is impossible
for the public forms to refer to private bindings.
To solve that issue, I had to pass the
On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 15:30:32 +0100
Panicz Maciej Godek wrote:
> After reading some of the original paper by Dybvig[1],
> I finally managed to get the macro right. The trick
> was to use "with-syntax", which -- I have to admit
> -- is still a little magical to me. But by mimicking
> the way the proc
After reading some of the original paper by Dybvig[1],
I finally managed to get the macro right. The trick
was to use "with-syntax", which -- I have to admit
-- is still a little magical to me. But by mimicking
the way the procedure "generate-temporaries" has
been used in the Dybvig's implementatio
Hi,
is there any way to control the order of macro expansion?
Let's consider a particular problem.
I'm trying to write a macro to control the visibility
of certain definitions. I wrote it once, using define-macro,
but it seemed to loose some relevant information,
so I decided to rewrit
