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] What happened to (UNQUOTE <expression> ...) Andy Wingo (24 Apr 2011 10:53 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)
Re: [Scheme-reports] What happened to (UNQUOTE <expression> ...) Andy Wingo 24 Apr 2011 10:52 UTC 
On Sun 24 Apr 2011 04:12, Alex Shinn <alexshinn@gmail.com> writes:

> On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Andre van Tonder <andre@het.brown.edu> wrote:
>> and (unquote-splicing <expression> ...)?
>>
>> In other words, more than one argument to UNQUOTE(-SPLICING).
>>
>> These were added in R6RS to fix some well-known shortcomings of quasiquote.
>> The issue and the R6RS solution had been known for a long time and were
>> discussed by many authors for many years before being adopted.
>> I for one liked the change and probably have code that depends on it.
>
> It looks reasonable to me, but could you point us
> to the discussions or rationales?

Here was a mail on guile-user arguing for the change:

  http://www.mail-archive.com/guile-user@gnu.org/msg03899.html

Guile did end up switching to support this case.

Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/

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