This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 72 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 72 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
Oops! I said:
> On the other hand, it seems more consistant if
>
> (define-syntax (swap! a b) <body)
>
> were the same as
>
> (define-syntax swap! (lambda ( _ a b) <body> ))
>
> which implies that swap! is right and the rest of
> the program is wrong.
I just noticed that this is a change you made in
the last revision, and that consistency also implies
that syntax-case is wrong. I've always felt slightly
nauseous when I thought about syntax-case, and now
I know a good reason for it. I suppose the syntax-case
users are not eager to remove the parentheses around
their <formals>? Please? Oh well.
--
-- Keith Wright
Programmer in Chief, Free Computer Shop
--- Food, Shelter, Source code. ---