Richard Shann <[email protected]> writes:
> Thanks to all guileans who have responded. I seem to have a workable
> solution based on Neil's code. The thing I hadn't grokked was the
> existence of the with-input-from-string procedure. I had been messing
> with defined? and symbol? but got nowhere.
I would say the magic is more in `read' than in
`with-input-from-string'.
`read' is responsible for the conversion from
something-that-looks-like-code to actual code - which in your case is a
single symbol. `with-input-from-string' just tells `read' that the
something-that-looks-like-code is a string.
Regards,
Neil
