Am Di., 15. Nov. 2022 um 21:38 Uhr schrieb John Cowan <xxxxxx@ccil.org>:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 3:28 PM Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The form I originally proposed is a generalization of let/let* where
>> the compiler figures out the dependencies.  If the graph is not
>> acyclic, it would be an error.
>
>
> The compiler cannot reliably do that.  If v is bound in a wider scope then (let* ((v 0) (v2 v)) ...) means one thing and (let ((v 0) (v2 v)) ...) means something else.

Exactly! And that's why my proposal uses "using":

(let* ((v 0) (v2 v)) ...)

becomes (syntax debatable)

(let ((v 0) (v2 (using (v) v))) ...)

while

(let ((v 0) (v2 v)) ...)

just stays as it is.