>> Would it be equivalent behavior to turn the datum into a syntax object >> instead? That is: >> >> ;; within do-plain-eval: >> (cond [(syntax? s) >> (syntax-case s (module) >> [(module . _rest) (syntax->datum s)] >> [_else s])] >> [(bytes? s) (datum->syntax #f s)] >> [(string? s) (datum->syntax #f s)] >> [else s])))) >> >> If this looks right, I can send as a patch. > > I'm not completely certain, but that looks ok to me.
Ok, good. I ran into this when starting to scribble my April Fools joke, as Arctangent doesn't provide a "begin" form. I'll send a patch shortly. I'm running into another issue with @interactions where it does not preserve the square-bracketness of an expression before passing it to the evaluator. Fixing the bug looks more involved. I'll send a bug report. _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
