[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Scheme-reports] 5.5.1 module syntax
- To: Andy Wingo <wingo@x>
- Subject: Re: [Scheme-reports] 5.5.1 module syntax
- From: Andre van Tonder <andre@x>
- Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 10:25:29 -0400 (EDT)
- Cc: scheme-reports@x
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <email@example.com> <20110519181901.GN3745@mercury.ccil.org> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <op.vvrcp4qs0p3ku8@localhost> <email@example.com>
On Fri, 20 May 2011, Andy Wingo wrote:
> On Fri 20 May 2011 04:19, "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@x> writes:
>> Yes, this is equivalent. The location of imports has no effect on their
>> importing. The Body elements are concatenated together and evaluated in
>> the context of an environment defined by the sum total of the imports.
> I did not see this language in the report. Suggestion: add it, or point
> me to the language :)
Going even further, the module toplevel is almost not described in the
report at all. Can we redefine a previously defined identifier? Can
we shadow an import with a definition? What is the scope of a module
level macro definition? Can we intersperse definitions and expressions?
I'm sure I can think of more unanswered questions in the same vein.
Scheme-reports mailing list