On Sep 10, 2009, at 6:23 PM, Ray Dillinger wrote:
> +1. For debugging purposes, redefinition of macro forms *should*
> cause all the call sites for that macro to be re-expanded. But in
> the case of schemes that don't want to keep the (unexpanded)
> source code lying around in case of macro-redefinition, that
> isn't a tractable requirement.
I'm having trouble understanding how this would work in practice.
Given the following:
(define-syntax my-define-syntax
(syntax-rules ()
((_ a b) (define-syntax a b))))
(my-define-syntax my-define-syntax
(syntax-rules ()
((_ a b) (define-syntax a (syntax-rules (z) ((_ z) ()))))))
What happens at the point of the second definition?
What happens if, instead, I have the following?
(my-define-syntax my-define-syntax
(syntax-rules ()
((_ a b) (define-syntax a b))))
--
Brian Mastenbrook
[email protected]
http://brian.mastenbrook.net/
_______________________________________________
r6rs-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
