Re: [racket-users] Re: syntax expands to define syntax, problems with ...

2017-03-15 Thread Dan Liebgold
On Wednesday, March 15, 2017 at 9:36:19 AM UTC-7, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: > You need to escape the ... with another ..., like this: > That's what I forgot. Is there any other case where things are escaped in this manner? It's a little surprising... Thanks, Dan -- You received this

Re: [racket-users] Re: syntax expands to define syntax, problems with ...

2017-03-15 Thread Stephen Chang
The inner ellipses need to be "escaped". I like using the dot notation in nested macros but I know others do not like that style. (define-syntax (test stx) (syntax-case stx () ((_ n e ...) #'(define-syntax (n stx) (syntax-case stx () ((_ e0 (... ...))

[racket-users] Re: syntax expands to define syntax, problems with ...

2017-03-15 Thread Dan Liebgold
Here's what works, not using the inner ellipses: http://pasterack.org/pastes/34338 But I'd prefer to use the ellipses.. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send

[racket-users] Re: syntax expands to define syntax, problems with ...

2017-03-15 Thread Dan Liebgold
Oops, try this link instead (that one had simple mistakes): http://pasterack.org/pastes/68032 On Wednesday, March 15, 2017 at 9:22:24 AM UTC-7, Dan Liebgold wrote: > I feel like I'm forgetting something basic, but how can I have a syntax > transformer expand to a define-syntax, both using