Re: [Scheme-reports] Are generated toplevel definitions secret?

[John Cowan <cowan@x>]

Aaron W. Hsu scripsit:

> > In otehr words, definitions introduced in macros can possibly shadow
> > toplevel bindings, which is a major obstacle to safe hygienic macro
> > programming.
>
> More than a major obstacle, I would argue that this violates hygiene
> and should not be allowed in Scheme's hygienic macros.

On that principle, how can you write a macro like define-record-type
that defines (and potentially redefines, at least in the REPL) various
identifiers?

-- 
Cash registers don't really add and subtract;           John Cowan
        they only grind their gears.                    cowan@x
But then they don't really grind their gears, either;   
        they only obey the laws of physics.  --Unknown

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