Andrew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > But let me ask. Suppose you are using a typical Scheme implementation > in which CAR and CDR operate only on plain pairs. You are then > constrained to implement compound syntax objects as lists. You have > lost the ability to use some other abstraction. As a practical > matter, what impact does that have on you? What would you like to be > able to do with a syntax object abstraction that you'd not be able to > do if you've lost that abstraction?
Change its representation. -- Cheers =8-} Mike Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla
