-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 01/11/2013 02:43 AM, Noah Lavine wrote:
> It really seems like your goal is explicitly unhygienic - the same > symbol has a different meaning inside certain macros, even though the > user didn't every bind it differently. AIUI, Alex's goal is to have the same unhygiene that (quote ...) has. The symbols within need to be taken just as symbols, not as identifiers, and that's that. ABS - -- Alaric Snell-Pym http://www.snell-pym.org.uk/alaric/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAlDv4gEACgkQRgz/WHNxCGrwYACfWzvpH91w0/Dcw8pwLI+Cp7rg id8An0KiwrYaKAuUZluIw5/M08zs9zOC =Zc+n -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
