Email list hosting service & mailing list manager

s7 suggestion bil@xxxxxx (29 Oct 2019 13:40 UTC)
Re: s7 suggestion Lassi Kortela (29 Oct 2019 15:15 UTC)
Re: s7 suggestion bil@xxxxxx (29 Oct 2019 15:56 UTC)
Re: s7 suggestion Lassi Kortela (29 Oct 2019 16:19 UTC)
Re: s7 suggestion Lassi Kortela (29 Oct 2019 16:32 UTC)
Re: s7 suggestion bil@xxxxxx (29 Oct 2019 17:53 UTC)
Re: s7 suggestion Lassi Kortela (29 Oct 2019 18:06 UTC)
Re: s7 suggestion John Cowan (01 Nov 2019 21:26 UTC)
Re: s7 suggestion Lassi Kortela (01 Nov 2019 21:35 UTC)
Re: s7 suggestion John Cowan (01 Nov 2019 23:03 UTC)
&key vs :key in the lambda list Lassi Kortela (01 Nov 2019 23:17 UTC)
Re: &key vs :key in the lambda list John Cowan (01 Nov 2019 23:18 UTC)
Re: &key vs :key in the lambda list Lassi Kortela (01 Nov 2019 23:27 UTC)
Syntax for hygienic vs non-hygienic keywords Lassi Kortela (01 Nov 2019 23:33 UTC)
Re: allow-other-keys bil@xxxxxx (29 Oct 2019 19:51 UTC)
Re: s7 suggestion Marc Nieper-Wi├čkirchen (29 Oct 2019 16:32 UTC)
Re: s7 suggestion Lassi Kortela (29 Oct 2019 16:53 UTC)
Re: s7 suggestion bil@xxxxxx (29 Oct 2019 17:10 UTC)
Including 177 in s7? Lassi Kortela (29 Oct 2019 17:34 UTC)

Including 177 in s7? Lassi Kortela 29 Oct 2019 17:34 UTC

> Currently, with-let is immutable -- I don't think that's
> the perfect solution, but it's simpler than using
> #_with-let all the time.  A lot of that portion of
> s7 is experimental.

If we manage to arrive at a SRFI 177 design that Scheme implementors are
generally satisfied with, would you be willing to ship the macros with
s7? That way the SRFI implementation can evolve with s7's macro system.

The current s7 implementation is a 27 lines, 5 lines of which is a
`split-last` helper. So it's not huge but it'd be nice to find something
even simpler.