On Dec 26, 2010, at 2:56 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> Yes.
Okay, I should probably ask: would it be possible for the stepper to do a
principled job of inserting references to stepper procedures in such a way that
the user's module could not refer to them? (Currently, it uses 3D syntax for
this.
Yes.
At Sun, 26 Dec 2010 17:48:14 -0500, Eric Dobson wrote:
> Ok, that makes sense. So would the correct way to create code for
> runtime at expansion-time, be to use syntax objects which represent
> code that evaluates to procedures instead of the procedures
> themselves?
>
> -Eric
>
> On Sun,
Ok, that makes sense. So would the correct way to create code for
runtime at expansion-time, be to use syntax objects which represent
code that evaluates to procedures instead of the procedures
themselves?
-Eric
On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> At Sun, 26 Dec 2010 17:31:23
At Sun, 26 Dec 2010 17:31:23 -0500, Eric Dobson wrote:
> I am trying to understand how the expansion/compilation process deals
> with embedding procedures in the syntax of a program, and I have now
> constructed a program that returns different values when run in
> drracket, and racket. It also doe
I am trying to understand how the expansion/compilation process deals
with embedding procedures in the syntax of a program, and I have now
constructed a program that returns different values when run in
drracket, and racket. It also does not compile for me using raco make.
I was wondering what peop
5 matches
Mail list logo
