Mark,
thanks again for your remarks
> 2018-05-30 3:07 GMT+02:00 Mark H Weaver :
>
>
You're right, it is problematic, and it's good that you noticed that.
> It exposes internal details of Guile's implementation, which is quite
> likely to change in the future. Do not use this interface if you can
Hi,
Catonano writes:
> 2018-05-30 3:07 GMT+02:00 Mark H Weaver :
>
> This is just a toy, and not very useful in practice.
> Here's the equivalent formulation for Guile:
>
>(use-modules (system syntax)
> (srfi srfi-11))
>
>(define (syntax-local-value id)
> (let-valu
Mark,
thank you very much for explaining at lenght, I appreciate that !
2018-05-30 3:07 GMT+02:00 Mark H Weaver :
> Hi,
>
> Catonano writes:
>
> > 2018-05-29 17:01 GMT+02:00 Mark H Weaver :
> > > what's the problem with macroexpand-1 and syntax-case ?
>
Hi,
Catonano writes:
> 2018-05-29 17:01 GMT+02:00 Mark H Weaver :
> > what's the problem with macroexpand-1 and syntax-case ?
>
> In Guile 1.x, 'macroexpand-1' performed a single macro expansion step at
> the top-level form of an expression, using its o
Mark,
2018-05-29 17:01 GMT+02:00 Mark H Weaver :
> Hi,
>
> Catonano writes:
>
> > in the NEWS file, I read:
> >
> >
> > ...
> > ** Removed function: `macroexpand-1'
> >
> > It is unclear how to implement `macroexpand-1' with s
Anyway: thank you !!
Hi,
Catonano writes:
> in the NEWS file, I read:
>
>
> ...
> ** Removed function: `macroexpand-1'
>
> It is unclear how to implement `macroexpand-1' with syntax-case, though
> PLT Scheme does prove that it is possible.
>
>
> what's the problem wi
in the NEWS file, I read:
...
** Removed function: `macroexpand-1'
It is unclear how to implement `macroexpand-1' with syntax-case, though
PLT Scheme does prove that it is possible.
what's the problem with macroexpand-1 and syntax-case ?
Thanks
