> Woah, cool! > > Since the book was written, we have added support for binding > specifications to Redex. It's documentation is still in the process of > being improved, but you might have some interest in checking it out > (it is the part after #:binding-forms).
I read the documentation and this feature is really impressive. In particular, I liked that Redex is able to recognize that two terms are alpha-equivalent! The way I understood from my first reading, it seems like the binding feature handles well lexical scoping. Would it be able to support a language with dynamic scoping? I ask that because I'm currently working on a language which notion of scoping is something in between lexical and dynamic. > Bugs in substitution functions are the worst. Indeed :) -- Leandro Facchinetti <[email protected]> https://www.leafac.com GPG key: 3DF3D583 -- 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 [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
