Re: [racket] Check syntax and disappearing bindings

2011-08-14 Thread Vincent St-Amour
`syntax-local-introduce' fixed the problem. Thanks! Vincent At Sun, 14 Aug 2011 08:20:59 -0500, Robby Findler wrote: > > Yes, those are the properties that you want. I guess the problem is > that the identifiers don't actually bind each other (rather than Check > Syntax not finding the propert

Re: [racket] Check syntax and disappearing bindings

2011-08-14 Thread Robby Findler
Yes, those are the properties that you want. I guess the problem is that the identifiers don't actually bind each other (rather than Check Syntax not finding the properties). For example, this macro works fine: (define-syntax (m stx) (syntax-case stx () [(_ id1 id2) (syntax-pro

[racket] Check syntax and disappearing bindings

2011-08-12 Thread Vincent St-Amour
I have a macro that restructures `let' binding lists, and I would like to have it play nice with Check Syntax. Here's an example: (let ([x 1.2+3.4i]) body ...) is expanded to: (let ([x-real 1.2] [x-imag 3.4]) body ...) with references to `x' replaced by references to `x-real' and `x