Re: propositions, oppositions, and some minor details Andre van Tonder 15 Sep 2004 13:01 UTC

On Wed, 15 Sep 2004, Felix Winkelmann wrote:

> What if file a.scm defines a macro that file b.scm uses (by refering
> to syntax defined in a module declared in a.scm)?

This is an important and interesting issue, but I am afraid that if we
have to describe a full solution, the SRFI will never be completed.  For
those who might not be aware of it, one apparently coherent solution is
of course well described in Matthew Flatt's Compilable Macros paper (in
which he even sketches an implementation of records).  For the purposes of
this SRFi, however, would people object to just keeping the wording of
SRFI-9 for now?