At Tue, 25 Jun 2013 01:11:45 -0400, Asumu Takikawa wrote: > Hi all, > > Does anyone know what the behavior of > > (local-transformer-expand #'(define x 3) 'top-level null) > > should be? I'm not sure, but I expected something like what > `local-expand` would do. Instead, I get an error like this: > > > (define-syntax (m stx) > (local-transformer-expand > #'(define x 3) 'top-level null)) > > (m) > ; readline-input:14:51: define: not allowed in an expression context > ; in: (define x 3) > ; [,bt for context] > > Am I just misuing the function?
That error is due to a bug in handling the 'top-level context, and I've pushed a repair. > I also tried to wrap the quoted > definition with a `let`, but then got errors saying `let-values` is > unbound (which seems odd since it's a core form). That's actually the right error. The `let' successfully expands to `let-values' in phase 1. The `let-values' identifier in the expansion has a phase-1 binding, but not a phase-0 binding. When the `let-values' form is returned as the result of expanding `(m)', then it ends up in a phase-0 context, and that triggers the error you. _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
