On Sun, 24 Apr 2011, Peter Bex wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 05:21:30PM +0200, Peter Bex wrote:
>>> Heh, cool.  Fortunately it's not central to my argument.  How about an
>>> accessor macro:
>>>
>>>       (begin
>>>         (define-syntax define-getter
>>>           (syntax-rules ()
>>>             ((_ var init)
>>>              (begin
>>>                (define val init)
>>>                (define-syntax var
>>>                  (syntax-rules ()
>>>                    ((_) val)))))))
>>>
>>>         (define-getter x 10)
>>>         (define-getter y 20))
>>>
>>> If I put that in a chicken module, import the module, then evaluate (x)
>>> and (y), does that evaluate to 10 and 20, respectively?
>>
>> Yeah.  Each macro carries its syntactic information with it, like a
>> closure.  So "val" in the macro expansion would refer to the x that is
>> defined in that module.
>
> I overlooked the fact that val is used, not var.  This will give an
> error because the "val" is defined in a different phase than the "var"
> macro is declared.

No, it is still the same phase.

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