> But honestly, I think it's better to just drop require-extension-for-syntax > and perhaps even require-extension.
The former, yes. The latter is a SRFI, even though few support it. > > One more question: Where should we document "the initial (nameless) macro > environment"? For example, cond-expand and module and such need a place > to be documented too, and they're strictly speaking not part of a module > (but it's weird to have to look them up somewhere completely different). Perhaps some introductory section on the module system would be appropriate? > > OK, one more question and then I'll stop :) > What about this note in expand.som: > ;; TODO: Eventually, cond-expand should move to the > ;; (chicken base) module to match r7rs. Keeping it in the initial env > ;; makes it a whole lot easier to write portable CHICKEN 4 & 5 code. Not sure what is the question here... But I would tend to the latter. felix _______________________________________________ Chicken-hackers mailing list Chickenfirstname.lastname@example.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers