Is there a way to define a syntax-class so that for example in: (syntax-parse stx [(_ a:stxcls) ….]) It would be able to know that it was used with a, instead of for instance b in b:stxcls?
Is that possible? If not, would it be a good idea to add? The reason I ask is that then it might be possible to define a `lit` syntax-class that would do this: (syntax-parse stx [+:lit #’+]) And have it check that stx matched the literal +, but also bound + as a pattern variable. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
