This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 24 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 24 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
Hello everybody, The proposal has me wondered if letrec-mixed is actually a part of the proposal (in the sense that a SRFI-24 compliant Scheme has to provide it), or if it is just a way to explain the semantics of internal define-syntaxen. I would recommend against making letrec-mixed obligatory. The reason is that tomorrow somebody wants to add internal SRFI-9 record types, then somebody wants to add internal define-values, and so on and so on. Doing all this with letrex-mixed2, letrec-mixed3, etc. gets old very fast. We get a combinatorial explosion of possible letrex-mixed's. Already with define-syntax, define-values and SRFI-9 we have 2^3 = 8 possible letrec's (including the original R5RS letrec). So IMHO it is fine to describe the effect of internal define-syntax in terms of some helper function, but please refrain from requiring implementations to provide letrec-mixed. Stephan -- Make sure you don't miss this! http://www.win.tue.nl/scee2002 4th International Workshop on Scientific Computing in Electrical Engineering 23-28 June 2002, Eindhoven, The Netherlands "Share and enjoy." ----------------------------------------------------------------------- S.H.M.J. Houben Philips Research Laboratories Eindhoven Building: WAY3 073 Prof. Holstlaan 4 Phone: +31 40 2743497 5656 AA Eindhoven The Netherlands mailto:houben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx