I believe this due to an edge case of 'module': when there is only one form
provided, it is partially expanded to determine if its expansion would lead
to a #%plain-module-begin form. Otherwise (more than one form provided)
they are wrapped in #%module-begin with no partial expansion occurring.
Below, the two modules `test1` and `test2` use the same expander `exp` and
otherwise differ only in the presence of the string "foo" as the second datum
in `test2`.
The syntax objects passed to #%module-begin are more different than that,
however: the syntax passed to the first is
I'd take this thread as evidence that outdated information is easier to
discover than Rhombus. How many mentions of "Racket2" currently ranking in
search engines have added mentions of Rhombus? Maybe it's not a big problem
right now, but could it get harder to manage?
Original Message
The project name is "Rhombus". The language name is TBD.
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/racket-users/-x_M5wIhtWk/V47eL30HCgAJ
At Mon, 13 Jan 2020 07:38:55 -0800 (PST), John Cowan wrote:
>
>
> On Sunday, July 14, 2019 at 10:30:04 PM UTC-4, Matthew Flatt wrote:
>
> At RacketCon today,
On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 10:38 AM John Cowan wrote:
>
>
> On Sunday, July 14, 2019 at 10:30:04 PM UTC-4, Matthew Flatt wrote:
>
> At RacketCon today, after summarizing the state of work on Racket CS, I
>> recommended that we next explore the possibly of changing to an
>> infix-oriented syntax in
On Sunday, July 14, 2019 at 10:30:04 PM UTC-4, Matthew Flatt wrote:
At RacketCon today, after summarizing the state of work on Racket CS, I
> recommended that we next explore the possibly of changing to an
> infix-oriented syntax in "Racket2".
>
I realize that Racket2 is the name of the
Racketeers very welcome at BOB - makes a great package with Racketfest
and/or :clojureD!
BOB 2020
Conference
“What happens if we simply use
7 matches
Mail list logo
