Re: [racket-users] Defining a symbol breaks symbols?

Would you expect anything different if it were a normal macro? #lang racket (define-syntax-rule (define-quote (arg ...) expr) (define (quote arg ...) expr)) (define-quote (x) 5) (define-quote (x) 5) (quote 3) This also compiles without error, and also returns 3. Were you expecting a

Re: [racket-users] Defining a symbol breaks symbols?

> On Oct 18, 2015, at 9:03 AM, Gustavo Massaccesi wrote: > > This "breaks" my old example: > > #lang hygienic-quote racket > (define-syntax-rule (quasiquote x) (reverse 'x)) > `(1 2 3 4) > > Nice idea! > > I found a strange side effect of the use of the marks. This

Re: [racket-users] Defining a symbol breaks symbols?

This "breaks" my old example: #lang hygienic-quote racket (define-syntax-rule (quasiquote x) (reverse 'x)) `(1 2 3 4) Nice idea! I found a strange side effect of the use of the marks. This compiles without error: #lang hygienic-quote racket (define 'x 5) (define 'x 5) '3 But I think it's

Re: [racket-users] Defining a symbol breaks symbols?

Sorry it took so long, but I just finished making a meta-language that adds quote, quasiquote, etc. as hygienic reader extensions. https://github.com/AlexKnauth/hygienic-quote-lang So now, you can write #lang hygienic-quote racket To make

Re: off topic, Re: [racket-users] Defining a symbol breaks symbols?

Yes, sorry, I've been traveling and didn't have time to respond. I was originally tempted to say "statically typed" and then realized that wasn't exactly right, because it was not static types that would forbid such a construction, so I said "static languages" suggesting languages where things

Re: off topic, Re: [racket-users] Defining a symbol breaks symbols?

> On Oct 8, 2015, at 9:00 AM, Lyle Kopnicky wrote: > > Yes, sorry, I've been traveling and didn't have time to respond. I was > originally tempted to say "statically typed" and then realized that wasn't > exactly right, because it was not static types that would forbid

off topic, Re: [racket-users] Defining a symbol breaks symbols?

On Oct 2, 2015, at 9:50 AM, "John B. Clements" wrote: > >> On Sep 30, 2015, at 2:57 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote: >> >> >> On Sep 30, 2015, at 4:19 PM, Lyle Kopnicky wrote: >> >>> I'm used to static languages lately

Re: [racket-users] Defining a symbol breaks symbols?

> On Sep 30, 2015, at 2:57 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote: > > > On Sep 30, 2015, at 4:19 PM, Lyle Kopnicky wrote: > >> I'm used to static languages lately and it's been a long time since I've >> programmed in a Lisp. > > > With respect, what

Re: [racket-users] Defining a symbol breaks symbols?

2015-09-30 19:35 GMT+02:00 Lyle Kopnicky : > Hi folks, > > It seems that if I (incorrectly) quote a symbol in a 'define' form, it > breaks all symbols from that point on. I would expect instead it would give > me an error saying that I passed the wrong sort of thing to

[racket-users] Defining a symbol breaks symbols?

Hi folks, It seems that if I (incorrectly) quote a symbol in a 'define' form, it breaks all symbols from that point on. I would expect instead it would give me an error saying that I passed the wrong sort of thing to 'define', and not break future use of symbols. Is this a bug? Welcome to

Fwd: [racket-users] Defining a symbol breaks symbols?

-- Forwarded message -- From: *Lyle Kopnicky* <lylew...@gmail.com> Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 Subject: [racket-users] Defining a symbol breaks symbols? To: Jason Hemann <jhem...@umail.iu.edu> Ha, thanks, Jens and Jason, for the explanation. That makes sen

Re: [racket-users] Defining a symbol breaks symbols?

On Sep 30, 2015, at 4:19 PM, Lyle Kopnicky wrote: > I'm used to static languages lately and it's been a long time since I've > programmed in a Lisp. With respect, what could the word "static" possibly mean here? Does "reading code" happen at run-time here? Is macro

Re: [racket-users] Defining a symbol breaks symbols?

> On Sep 30, 2015, at 5:45 PM, Alex Knauth wrote: > > >> On Sep 30, 2015, at 4:19 PM, Lyle Kopnicky > > wrote: >> That bothers me a bit. It looks unhygienic, as the quote function is being >> captured. I guess reader

Re: [racket-users] Defining a symbol breaks symbols?

> On Sep 30, 2015, at 4:19 PM, Lyle Kopnicky <lylew...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: Lyle Kopnicky <lylew...@gmail.com <mailto:lylew...@gmail.com>> > Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 > Subject: [rack