[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Scheme-reports] auxiliary syntax
- To: scheme-reports <scheme-reports@x>
- Subject: [Scheme-reports] auxiliary syntax
- From: Andy Wingo <wingo@x>
- Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2013 20:28:09 +0100
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 do suspect that people that aren't used to bound auxiliary syntax will
find it a bit odd.
Scheme-reports mailing list