[r6rs-discuss] Comments on syntax-rules

From: Michael Sperber <sperber>
Date: Sun Nov 19 13:44:47 2006

David Van Horn <dvanhorn_at_cs.brandeis.edu> writes:

> A few notes and questions on syntax-rules:

I can only answer one of your bullets:

> 3) Why not cut the specification of syntax-rules, which is later
> subsumed and partly duplicated by the specification of syntax-case,
> and simply replace the current specification with its definition in
> terms of syntax-case?

This is to avoid creating a forward dependency between the two. Also,
many people (like myself) regard `syntax-rules' as simpler to use, and
have trouble dealing with `syntax-case'. We don't want to require
them to understand the much more complicated specification of
`syntax-case' just to be able to use `syntax-rules'.

-- 
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, V?lkerverst?ndigung und ?berhaupt blabla
Received on Sun Nov 19 2006 - 13:23:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Wed Oct 23 2024 - 09:15:00 UTC