thank you it is clear now , even if i really never find the macro needed upward i tested too in racket your example and the messages is simple to understand :
Welcome to DrRacket, version 8.9 [cs]. Language: reader "../Scheme-PLUS-for-Racket/main/Scheme-PLUS-for-Racket/SRFI/SRFI-105.rkt", with debugging; memory limit: 8192 MB. '() > foo foo: undefined; cannot reference an identifier before its definition > bar bar: undefined; cannot reference an identifier before its definition > (define (foo) (bar 'quux)) > (define-syntax-rule (bar x) x) > (display (foo)) . . ../../../../../../../Applications/Racket v8.9/collects/racket/private/kw.rkt:1263:25: bar: undefined; cannot reference an identifier before its definition On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 11:58 AM Jean Abou Samra <j...@abou-samra.fr> wrote: > > overload.scm must be before some definitions of scheme-infix.scm even > if it is not used here, it is strange, i do not understand all but it > compiles now > > > > A minimal reproducer for your problem is > > (define (foo) > (bar 'quux)) > (define-syntax-rule (bar x) x) > (display (foo)) > > > Let's dissect what happens. At macro expansion time (during byte > compilation), first the definition of foo is expanded. bar is unbound, so > it's compiled as a function call. Then comes the definition of bar as a > macro, but foo has already been expanded without it. > > At runtime, a macro is bound to a syntax transformer, so the binding for bar > that was unresolved at expand time gets resolved to the toplevel binding that > gets defined for bar, and you get this error because a macro transformer > can't be called as a function. > >