Re: [Scheme-reports] auxiliary syntax

[John Cowan <cowan@x>]

Peter Bex scripsit:

> I think trying to catch these things is misguided.  It's fine if an
> implementation like Racket does this to guide students, but seasoned
> Scheme programmers don't need this kind of hand-holding.

On the contrary.  The whole point of binding them by default is so that
they can safely be rebound and used as auxiliary keywords by other macros.
If they are left unbound, they are inherently non-hygienic.

If only syntax-parameters were a little more mature, I'd
propose them for R7RS-large like a shot: they are the best
resolution I have seen to the desire to break hygiene.  See
<http://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/stxparam.html> for Racket,
<http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/manual/html_node/Syntax-Parameters.html>
for Guile, and the paper
<http://www.schemeworkshop.org/2011/papers/Barzilay2011.pdf>.
In particular, it would be good to know if syntactic-closures and
explicit-renaming systems allow them easily.

-- 
John Cowan   cowan@x    http://ccil.org/~cowan
I come from under the hill, and under the hills and over the hills my paths
led. And through the air. I am he that walks unseen.  I am the clue-finder,
the web-cutter, the stinging fly. I was chosen for the lucky number.  --Bilbo

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