[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Macros; lexcial scope

In article <8805251659.AA00682@tub.UUCP> net@TUB.BITNET (Oliver Laumann)
>Consider the following example:
>   (define x 1)
>   (define-macro (m) x)
>   (let ((x 2))
>     (m))
>Would you expect that (m) evaluates to 1 or to 2?  In both Common Lisp
>(using a different syntax, of course) and C-Scheme, (m) returns 1 in the
>example above.  Thus, it looks as if the first time the macro body is
>evaluated, the evaluation takes place in the lexical scope of the

Rather, that the macro is evaluated in the lexical scope in which it was 
defined, just like regular functions.

>Now consider a slighly more complex example:
>   (define x 1)
>   (let ((x 2))
>     (define-macro (m) x)
>     (let ((x 3))
>       (m)))
>In both Common Lisp and C-Scheme, this evaluates to 1.

T's DEFINE-SYNTAX does what you want in both of these cases, evaluating to 1
in the first case and 2 in the second case.  

Bruce Krulwich