On Sun, 6 Sep 2009, Ray Dillinger wrote: > Eggs Ackley. The separation of phases valued by some seems to me > just a repeat of Lisp's earlier mistakes with dynamic vs. static > scope, in which code typed at the REPL had different semantics > than code loaded from a file. Also it limits runtime loading and > unloading of syntax, which is valuable in code that reasons about > or interprets code written in multiple other languages.
Keeping meta-levels separate is very helpful precisely in preventing a program from suddenly changing its meaning when you compile it after testing it in a REPL. In other words, associating meta-levels with bindings is done to avoid your complaint of the same text having different meanings in the REPL and in compiled code (for the most part). Having a syntactic tower (meta-levels) can still be done even if everything is run in a purely interpretative REPL and does not preclude runtime loading of syntax. Andre _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
