Re: [racket-users] Composing `splicing-let-syntax` with `prop:rename-transformer` and `module+` (or anything made with `syntax-local-lift-module-end-decloration`

Ah, okay, that makes sense, and fixed my issue. Thank you very much. ~Leif Andersen On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote: > A short answer: When compiling a submodule, as for any other module, > imported modules get fresh compile-time instantiations. It you want to > run effects

Re: [racket-users] Composing `splicing-let-syntax` with `prop:rename-transformer` and `module+` (or anything made with `syntax-local-lift-module-end-decloration`

A short answer: When compiling a submodule, as for any other module, imported modules get fresh compile-time instantiations. It you want to run effects from the enclosing module (which is an implicit import), the effects must be in `begin-for-syntax`. A long answer: When you write (module+ tes

[racket-users] Composing `splicing-let-syntax` with `prop:rename-transformer` and `module+` (or anything made with `syntax-local-lift-module-end-decloration`

Hello, I am noticing that if I in the body of splicing-let-syntax I put a module+, or anything that lifts with syntax-local-lift-module-end-decloration really, The stuff that gets lifted out doesn't seem to match what I would expect it to. I suspect this is in part do to using prop:rename-transfo