Thanks for all the details! > p.s. (Only if you're interested) there is one feature missing from > the above SRFI-55 implementation that I, as a user, would desire: > expansion of a require-extension form should extend the compile-time > syntactic environment with any syntax that is provided by the SRFI's > that the form is requiring.
You mean for SRFIs that export macros, like SRFI-42? Are you making a distinction between interpreted and compile-time? Best, Dan _______________________________________________ Larceny-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ccs.neu.edu/bin/listinfo/larceny-users
