[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: R5RS draft: <body> in LET{REC}-SYNTAX ???
I don't see the problem here. Richard Kelsey wrote:
> But there is some confusion. We (or at least I) would
> like to allow LET{REC}-SYNTAX forms that are at top level
> to expand into a sequence of definitions that are spliced
> into the program. This would be disallowed if the usual
> `expressions are evaluated in order and the value(s) of
> the last one is returned' language were used. Splicing a
> list of commands into a program has a perfectly reasonable
> semantics, and is already done with BEGIN.
Why can't a person who wants a LET{REC}-SYNTAX form to expand
into a sequence of definitions D1, ... just write the form so
it expands into (BEGIN D1 ...) instead? This will work in every
context that admits a sequence of definitions.
If the problem has to do with the fact that R5RS Scheme doesn't
let you mix top-level definitions and commands within a single
top-level BEGIN, then I see the problem, but I don't think it has
much to do with LET{REC}-SYNTAX. We should just change the syntax
to allow top-level BEGIN forms that mix definitions with commands.
Will