Thanks for detail reply. On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 2:22 PM, John Cowan <[email protected]> wrote: > Consensus in the Working Group is that they, and the phasing problems > they introduce, were unsuitable for the small language. With just > syntax-rules, we didn't have to worry about the issues of executing > Scheme code at compile time (that is, macro expansion time).
Ok. > They will be present in the large language, at least in the form of > explicit-renaming macros. Syntactic closures and syntax-rules are also > possibilities. As someone who is interest in getting almost full control of expansion (with expected consequences) and focusing on other interpreter/compiler details than implement various expanders, I'm still quite interest in old and well known 'define-macro'. Is there anyone interest in such feature? I'm I able to propose it and what prerequisites I should meet? Best. _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
