Yes, but this is a problem with renamed bindings introduced by
hygienic
macros. For example:
(define-syntax foo
(syntax-rules ()
((_ x) (let ((tmp x)) (assert x "failed")))))
riaxpander manages this:
(use riaxpander)
(define-macro (my-assert test error)
`(if (not ,test) (error ,error)))
(define-syntax foo
(syntax-rules ()
((_ x) (let ((tmp x)) (my-assert x "failed")))))
(macroexpand '(let ((x 1)) (foo x)))
#;24> (macroexpand '(let ((x 1)) (foo x)))
((lambda (x#0) ((lambda (tmp#1) (if (not x#0) (error "failed")))
x#0)) 1)
I deliberately re-used the symbol x there, but it's neatly side-
stepped around that, as far as I can see? Or is there some more
esoteric test case I need to work out?
ABS
--
Alaric Snell-Pym
Work: http://www.snell-systems.co.uk/
Play: http://www.snell-pym.org.uk/alaric/
Blog: http://www.snell-pym.org.uk/?author=4
_______________________________________________
Chicken-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
