David Feuer skrev:
> I think Petrofsky's suggestion for handling ellipses (SRFI-46) is far
> cleaner that the one in the SRFI-93 draft.  For syntax-rules macros, I
> would recommend adopting the SRFI-46 method, or something very similar
> to it.  As well as being easier to understand, I believe that the
> current proposal would be expressible in Petrofsky's syntax, but that
> the converse does not hold.  For syntax-case macros, I think we should
> take the opportunity to go all the way with Petrofsky's idea, and make
> the ellipsis identifier a required argument to SYNTAX-CASE.

The only place (... ...) is needed is in macro-defining macros, which
aren't too common. A search through the PLT code base for (... ...)
versus a search for ... gives a good impression of how uncommon it is.
In my opinion it would therefore be annoying to the specify the ellipsis
in the "boiler plate" every time I need to define a standard macro.

Furthermore with-syntax lets you choose your own ellipsis, when
you need to define a macro-defining macro:

   (with-syntax ((::: #'(... ...))
     <use ::: here>)

--
Jens Axel Søgaard