On Fri, 22 Apr 2011, Alex Shinn wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 7:46 AM, Andre van Tonder <andre@het.brown.edu> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, it must be the same binding.  Otherwise nested QUASIQUOTE will break.
>
> If we don't explicitly require that they are the same binding,
> and an implementation chooses to _not_ make them the
> same binding, then it must come up with some way to make
> quasiquote work.  It can choose to use the Chibi/Chicken
> approach, or it can use a macro implementation which can
> match the nested quasiquote with the actual identifier the
> form was expanded from, or it can make quasiquote match
> itself unhygienically.

And by the way, if the QUASIQUOTE macro doesn't work portably,
then the MATCH macro examle I had would likely not work either.

And if an implementation of SYNTAX-RULES matches keywords
unhygienically as you suggest in your workarounds, that
implementation would break many currently portable macros
that depend on hygienic matching to work.

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