(Previous discussion continued)
Re: isn't computation-rules redundant? Alex Shinn 28 Mar 2004 04:18 UTC

Re: isn't computation-rules redundant? Alex Shinn 28 Mar 2004 04:18 UTC

On Fri, Mar 26, 2004 at 10:41:48AM -0500, Andre van Tonder wrote:

> Your proposal, while more brief, conflates declaring the
> transformer and binding it, and only in define forms but not
> let(rec)-forms - in the latter you still have to write it out the long
> way.

I was suggesting doing the same for let-syntax, using something like
let-syntax-computations.

--
Alex