Andre van Tonder scripsit: > This, however, makes it difficult to write program transformers (for > example macro expanders), that need to insert generated symbols for > which the requirement is that they cannot be typed in user programs.
As others have posted, I think using a separate (and implementation specific) identifier type is now a win. At run time, gensyms are basically just strings that satisfy "symbol?" (and have p-lists, if your Scheme does p-lists), and if you need to play with such things, you are better off redefining "symbol?" or moving up to an informally-expressed union datatype of strings and true symbols. -- John Cowan http://ccil.org/~cowan [email protected] Economists were put on this planet to make astrologers look good. --Leo McGarry _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
