[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-users] hygienic branch (progress report, sort of)

From: felix winkelmann
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] hygienic branch (progress report, sort of)
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 09:33:21 +0200

On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 6:12 PM, Jim Ursetto <address@hidden> wrote:
> Possible bug?  Despite lambda being renamed in define's definition
> in expand.scm, it seems to break hygiene:
> (let ((lambda 3)) (define (foo x) x))

Hm... Yes, the expansion of lambda-bodies is pretty broken in several
ways. I have committed a change that may help for this particular
case, but the expansion of body-forms still uses the wrong syntactical
environment. I'll work on that.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]