> Just to make sure we're on the same page, this is the function that I > had in mind: > > (define (empty-scopes-everywhere? e)
That works. Thank you. > PS is the name of `strip-context` obsolete? Should it be `strip-scope-sets`? > > Maybe so. In retrospect, I like how "lexical context" is less connected > to an implementation, but the the different layers of terminology don't > line up precisely. Racket is introduced as a "lexically scoped language" [1]. And it already uses "context" for a separate idea within the macro expander [2]. So I agree that "scopes" is the better term (because it embraces both a conceptual and implementational idea). Moreover, at this point, the use of the term "lexical context" to mean "the scopes attached to a certain syntax object" seems to cloud the issue. [1] http://docs.racket-lang.org/quick/index.html#%28part._.Lexical_.Scope%29 <http://docs.racket-lang.org/quick/index.html#(part._.Lexical_.Scope)> [2] http://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/syntax-model.html?q=lexical%20context#%28part._expand-context-model%29 <http://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/syntax-model.html?q=lexical%20context#(part._expand-context-model)> -- 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 racket-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to racket-dev@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-dev/3432C358-16FF-475F-B2D0-B144920066FC%40mbtype.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
