Hi Burton,
> On Dec 18, 2017, at 21:10, Burton Samograd <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi David, > > An attempt at humour? No, not intentionally! haha But anything I can do that > can make people laugh is good in my books. I was wondering, after some of the other comments. But now I understand why you used macros on the major update functions. That isn’t something I would normally do because it precludes introducing computed parameter values, and also leaves you open to variable capture. So that degree of complexity seemed like it might have been part of the joke. I don’t recall completely, but it did seem like one of your uses of an update macro actually did introduce a free variable inside the macro, and that would then only work if the outer lexical context of the macro had a same-named binding. Macros introduce a whole other layer of complexity. That’s probably why so many in the Scheme camp seem bent on hygienic macros. Cheers, - DM
