This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 53 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 53 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
I have yet another idea.
(SYNTAX-SEQUENCE <clause> ... <final>)
<clause> ->
(COMPUTE <pattern> <syntactic computation>)
| (LET <pattern> <form>)
| (<syntactic computation>)
<final> -> <syntactic computation>
COMPUTE binds a pattern, a SYNTAX-RULES pattern, to the result of a
syntactic computation. LET simply binds a SYNTAX-RULES pattern with a
form, not a computation. The third kind of clause ignores the result
of a syntactic computation. The result of the SYNTAX-SEQUENCE form is
the result of the FINAL.
I also have a suggestion to rename SYNTAX-BIND to SYNTAX-EXTEND, as the
monadic >>= operator is often differently named.