On Jul 20, 2015, at 9:23 AM, Matthew Flatt <[email protected]> wrote:
> At Mon, 20 Jul 2015 08:20:32 -0500, Robby Findler wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 8:16 AM, Matthew Flatt <[email protected]> wrote: >>> At Sun, 19 Jul 2015 15:46:07 -0700, Alexis King wrote: >>>> One more thing: introducing a new scope with make-syntax-introducer seems >>>> to >>>> break DrRacket’s Check Syntax arrows for the whole module. >>> >>> That makes sense in retrospect. Adding an extra scope makes >>> `syntax-original?` produce #f for everything in whole module, and that >>> makes DrRacket ignore the identifiers. >> >> Not sure if it is relevant, but if you put the property >> 'original-for-check-syntax on an identifier, check syntax will treat >> it as if it was original. > > In this case, I think that would mark too many identifiers as original, > such as identifiers introduced by macros that are defined in the same > module. Wouldn't it only do that if the identifiers were original to begin with? I mean, if they were introduced by macros, then they wouldn't be original to begin with, and so a function produced by (make-syntax-introducer) wouldn't make it original unless it already was? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-dev/5F9F6631-2322-42E7-8D21-71531D32790A%40knauth.org. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
