well... when i test it in R6RS only your solution works, let and let-syntax
are no more interchangeable and all the stuff with kwd and syntax must be
keep :-O
at least in Racket/R6RS , not tested in Guile/R6RS:
(define-syntax for
(lambda (stx)
(syntax-case stx ()
((kwd (init test i
(Well, I thought the main reason why it didn't return a value was
(escape) in the old code, i.e., the continuation is called without
arguments.)
On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 11:16 AM Damien Mattei wrote:
>
> hello Mikael,
>
> you remark help because ,even if 'let' and 'let-syntax' seems interchangeabl
hello Mikael,
you remark help because ,even if 'let' and 'let-syntax' seems
interchangeable here, there was indeed a problem with syntax
i did not write myself the macro originally and when comparing with def.scm
that allow returning value from a function there was a difference, there
was no u
Hi Damien,
Maybe I'm missing something, but shoudn't it be:
(define-syntax for
(lambda (stx)
(syntax-case stx ()
((kwd (init test incrmt) body ...)
(with-syntax ((BREAK (datum->syntax (syntax kwd) 'break))
(CONTINUE (datum->syntax (syntax kwd) 'continue)))
hello,
i believed call/cc allowed to return value but i have this macro and i can
use continuation, but the value is not passed to the continuation:
(define-syntax for
(lambda (stx)
(syntax-case stx ()
((kwd (init test incrmt) body ...)
(with-syntax ((BREAK (datum->syntax
