> But honestly, I think it's better to just drop require-extension-for-syntax
> and perhaps even require-extension.
The former, yes. The latter is a SRFI, even though few support it.
>
> One more question: Where should we document "the initial (nameless) macro
> environment"? For example, cond-
On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:55 PM, Peter Bex wrote:
> I'm not sure why we still need these (probably because require-extension
> is a SRFI (55)?).
As a SRFI fan, I still say flush it. SRFI 55 isn't very portable: besides
Chicken, where it began, it spread only to Gauche, Guile, SISC, STklos,
Si
Hi all,
I was just moving things around in the CHICKEN 5 manual, and ran
into "require-extension-for-syntax". I thought we had removed
it and require-extension, but apparently both are part of the
(chicken base) module.
I'm not sure why we still need these (probably because require-extension
is