John Cowan wrote: > Alaric Snell-Pym scripsit: > >> Yep. That wouldn't couldn't shouldn't work in a REPL. But it'd be nice >> if it worked in a module form or other such construct that means the >> entire thing is available as a single s-expression, as not having to >> think hard about how to order things to make the recursion work is >> nice for the programmer. > > As I've posted before, I'm not thrilled with the idea. I want to be able > to read a program from top to bottom at least knowing what is syntax > (and idiosyncratic), thus being able to assume that everything else is > a procedure call (whose syntax is fixed). > > If I had my druthers, all programs would begin with syntax-rules macros > (possibly zero of them) at the top, and the rest of the code would use > those extensions and not be able to add any more new syntax.
You still wouldn't be able to categorize program text in this way. It's just undecidable in general, but that has little to do with the REPL or order of expansion. David _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
