> On May 2, 2016, at 11:50 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
>>
>> My initial statement was less precise than my second email.
>> `(syntax-local-introduce stx)` adds a single scope, using the
>> equivalent of `'flip` mode. That scope is "the current scope" for the
>> macro expansion step.
I appreci
On 2016-02-12 16:27:49 -0800, michael.ballantyne wrote:
> Does anyone know if that's a bug, or expected behavior?
Pretty sure this is a bug, and should be fixed now via
https://github.com/racket/racket/commit/25c9e9347a5060b0653986a65625378504815cad
Thanks for the report!
Cheers,
Asumu
--
> On May 1, 2016, at 12:59 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 5:56 PM, 'John Clements' via Racket Users
> wrote:
>>
>> It seems like the right way (well, *one* right way) to fix this, then,
>> would be to install a stub gui/main.rkt in “overridden-collects” that
>> uses a text
On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 10:44 AM, Alex Knauth wrote:
>
>> On May 2, 2016, at 10:00 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt
>> wrote:
>>
>> The problem with your first example is that there are some extra
>> scopes on `#'x` from the context that it's in. If you use
>> `(datum->syntax #f 'x)` (producing a syntax o
> On May 2, 2016, at 10:00 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
>
> The problem with your first example is that there are some extra
> scopes on `#'x` from the context that it's in. If you use
> `(datum->syntax #f 'x)` (producing a syntax object with no scopes on
> it) then your tests pass.
Trying to
The problem with your first example is that there are some extra
scopes on `#'x` from the context that it's in. If you use
`(datum->syntax #f 'x)` (producing a syntax object with no scopes on
it) then your tests pass.
What `syntax-local-introduce` does is add precisely the scope that the
expander
On May 2, 2016, at 9:10 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
>
> No, `syntax-local-introduce` is not hygenic. It's basically "pretend
> that this identifier was in the input", which is fundamentally
> unhygenic.
Sorry to be dense, but I still don't see the "pretend that this identifier was
in the i
On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 11:27 PM, Matthew Butterick wrote:
>
> While `syntax-local-introduce` now makes more sense to me, I still find it
> weird. Because is `syntax-local-introduce` hygienic? Well it doesn't seem
> UN-hygienic, inasmuch as it's not creating identifiers at the calling site.
> Bu
> On May 2, 2016, at 2:54 AM, Saša Janiška wrote:
>
> Eli Barzilay writes:
>
>> A sign that you're a dinosaur.
>
> Isn’t that nice these days? ;)
He may have meant to say “gentleman” but that may have the same operational
meaning.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed
**Call for Papers**
===
9th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Software Language Engineering (SLE
2016)
Oct 31-Nov 1, 2016, Amsterdam, Netherlands
(Co-located with SPLASH 2016)
General chair:
Tijs van der Storm, CWI,
-
C A L L F O R P A R T I C I P A T I O N
-
TFP 2016 ===
17th Symposium on Trends in Functional Programming
11 matches
Mail list logo
