On 02/26/2015 12:26 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
I've been working on a new macro expander for Racket, and I'm starting
to think that it will work. The new expander is not completely
compatible with the current expander --- and that will be an issue if
we eventually go forward with the change --- but most existing code
still works.
Here's a report on my current experiment:
http://www.cs.utah.edu/~mflatt/scope-sets/
I'm enjoying reading this so far. Scope sets correspond with how I've
fuzzily thought about identifier bindings anyway. (I've never liked
thinking in terms of marks.) It's nice to see it more formalized.
I suppose you could say lexical scopes are monotone w.r.t. the subset
relation. Nonmonotonicity means an identifier might resolve to somewhere
else.
If two different bindings' scope sets are subsets of the same scope,
which references are ambiguous?
Neil ⊥
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket
Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-dev/54F9CF39.9030204%40gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
