Re: [Scheme-reports] auxiliary syntax

[Alex Shinn <alexshinn@x>]

On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 4:28 AM, Andy Wingo <wingo@x> wrote:

I see that the report decided that the `_', `else', `...', etc auxiliary
syntaxes are to be bound in (scheme base).  That's probably a good
thing.  Good job.  I guess they'd be bound like:

  (define-syntax else (syntax-rules ())

Does that definition need to go in the report, along with the definition
of `cond' et al?

I don't think so.  Any definition will do - the purpose of the

definitions of derived syntax is to show non-trivial definitions.

-- 

Alex

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@x
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports