Re: The most general form of let/let*
Marc Nieper-WiÃkirchen 15 Nov 2022 20:48 UTC
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.
