Group Email Manager

login signup
[Scheme-reports] EVAL Andre van Tonder (23 Apr 2011 23:47 UTC)
[Scheme-reports] What happened to (UNQUOTE <expression> ...) Andre van Tonder (24 Apr 2011 00:04 UTC)
[Scheme-reports] Are generated toplevel definitions secret? Andre van Tonder (24 Apr 2011 00:15 UTC)
[Scheme-reports] COND, CASE, AND, ... macros are buggy Andre van Tonder (24 Apr 2011 00:24 UTC)
[Scheme-reports] Buggy definition of BEGIN Andre van Tonder (24 Apr 2011 00:33 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Buggy definition of BEGIN Jussi Piitulainen (24 Apr 2011 06:55 UTC)
[Scheme-reports] Restrictions on internal BEGIN? Andre van Tonder (24 Apr 2011 01:45 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Restrictions on internal BEGIN? Jussi Piitulainen (24 Apr 2011 07:20 UTC)
[Scheme-reports] Toplevel import scoping Andre van Tonder (24 Apr 2011 02:02 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Toplevel import scoping Alex Shinn (24 Apr 2011 02:44 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Toplevel import scoping Aaron W. Hsu (29 Apr 2011 17:11 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Toplevel import scoping Aaron W. Hsu (29 Apr 2011 17:10 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Are generated toplevel definitions secret? Andre van Tonder (24 Apr 2011 15:53 UTC)
(missing)
(missing)
(missing)
Re: Are generated toplevel definitions secret? Aaron W. Hsu (24 May 2011 18:51 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Are generated toplevel definitions secret? Sztefan Edwards (25 May 2011 14:32 UTC)
Re: Are generated toplevel definitions secret? Aaron W. Hsu (25 May 2011 20:03 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Are generated toplevel definitions secret? Perry E. Metzger (07 Nov 2011 18:40 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Are generated toplevel definitions secret? Perry E. Metzger (07 Nov 2011 18:45 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] What happened to (UNQUOTE <expression> ...) Andre van Tonder (24 Apr 2011 03:10 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] EVAL Alex Shinn (24 Apr 2011 02:10 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] EVAL John Cowan (24 Apr 2011 06:56 UTC)
[Scheme-reports] Are generated toplevel definitions secret? Andre van Tonder 24 Apr 2011 00:14 UTC 
R5RS didn't specify this, which was always a very annoying obstacle to
portability.  E.g.,

    (define x 1)
    (let-syntax ((foo (lambda (e)
                        (syntax (begin
                                  (define x 2)
                                  x)))))
      (foo))  ;==> 2
    x         ;==> NOT SPECIFIED IF IT SHOULD BE 1 or 2

It seems from my reading on p. 15 that R7RS doesn't specify it either.

In otehr words, definitions introduced in macros can possibly shadow toplevel
bindings, which is a major obstacle to safe hygienic macro programming.

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports