Thanks, I take note of that. I was mislead by the examples in the infix docs of Jens Axel Søgaard. These examples start with #lang at-exp scheme. Sorry, my fault. Jos
_____ From: Alexander D. Knauth [mailto:alexan...@knauth.org] Sent: viernes, 24 de abril de 2015 12:59 To: Jos Koot Cc: Jens Axel Søgaard; racket-users@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [racket-users] infix notation embedded in Racket On Apr 24, 2015, at 3:40 AM, Jos Koot <jos.k...@gmail.com> wrote: With respect to at-exp: I want my infix to be a simple macro that can be required within any arbitrary #lang racket module and cooperates well with all binding forms in that module. Well, since at-exp can be used with not only #lang racket but others as well (scheme, rackjure, clojure, afl, sweet-exp, basically anything that looks at the readtable), and doesn’t interfere with or require anything about the bindings, at-exp and (planet soegaard/infix) can be used with any arbitrary #lang whatever module as long as #lang whatever looks at the readtable and supports require. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
