Re: [racket-dev] implicit begin for define-syntax-rule

2012-05-07 Thread Eli Barzilay
Just now, Marijn wrote: > > Yes, that is indeed what I meant. > > I wanted to benefit from being able to use multiple forms as in > lambda, The problem is which if the two `begin' features you want -- splicing of definitions or sequencing side effects... > but on second thought I guess this wo

Re: [racket-dev] implicit begin for define-syntax-rule

2012-05-07 Thread Marijn
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 04-05-12 21:54, Vincent St-Amour wrote: > I don't think that's what Marijn was suggesting. > > I understood it as: > > (define-syntax-rule (define-complex real-name imag-name rhs) > (define real-name (real-part rhs)) (define imag-name (imag-part

Re: [racket-dev] implicit begin for define-syntax-rule

2012-05-04 Thread Vincent St-Amour
tx) > (syntax-rules stx () >[(_ pat0 ...) rhs0] >[(_ pats ...) rhss] ...)))])) > > -Ian > > - Original Message - > From: "Marijn" > To: dev@racket-lang.org > Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2012 5:39:10 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern > Su

Re: [racket-dev] implicit begin for define-syntax-rule

2012-05-03 Thread J. Ian Johnson
(define-syntax (id0 stx) (syntax-rules stx () [(_ pat0 ...) rhs0] [(_ pats ...) rhss] ...)))])) -Ian - Original Message - From: "Marijn" To: dev@racket-lang.org Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2012 5:39:10 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: [racket

[racket-dev] implicit begin for define-syntax-rule

2012-05-03 Thread Marijn
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, would it make sense for define-syntax-rule to have an implicit begin such that it could accept multiple forms for the template? Marijn -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://eni