Hi Andy, > Note that quasisyntax is now merged. You can do things without > quasisyntax using with-syntax.
Of course -- our version of quasisyntax is implemented in terms of with-syntax! I was just being lazy. > Your code is remarkably short. That is my initial impression, positive > :-) But I need to get to writing the NEWS now for today's release. I'll > take a look at these within the next week hopefully. Please poke if you > don't get another response in the next week. I probably should have said "rough prototype" instead of "working prototype" -- the actual macro that transforms library definitions into module definitions is kind of gross and uses datum->syntax a fair amount where it probably doesn't need to / shouldn't. I'm no syncase wizard. But I'm pretty sure it works for conventional libraries that import and export macros and regular bindings. (What I worry about are some of the hairier use cases of the whole "phased import" mechanism -- like a binding that's imported at `meta' level 2 or higher sharing a name with definition imported for use at runtime.) What I'm mostly interested in is whether you guys think the version and export patches are worth merging in some form or another -- my assumption has been these are features we actually want for Guile's module system. Thanks, Julian
