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

*To*: rees@YALE.ARPA*Subject*: T -> Scheme*From*: Lewis Johnson <johnson%YALE-MBUILD@YALE.ARPA>*Date*: Tue ,21 Aug 84 19:10:20 EDT*Cc*: t-discussion@YALE.ARPA

Jonathan, You claim that it is easy to eliminate T expressions which define symbols inside of LAMBDAs. I see how that works for certain cases, but how would you rewrite this? (let ((x ...)) (define y ...) (define z ...)) I can think of ways of doing it, such as this: (define y (let ((x ...)) (object (lambda ...) ((z-def self) (lambda ...))))) (define z (z-def y)) or this: (lset dummy (let ((x ...)) (object () ((y-def self) ...) ((z-def self) ...))) (define y (y-def dummy)) (define z (z-def dummy)) but I don't find either particularly elegant. Is there a better way? If not, then I'm not sure that changing the semantics of embedded DEFINEs is such a good idea. Lewis

- Prev by Date:
**Locales vs. contours** - Next by Date:
**Re: T -> Scheme** - Previous by thread:
**modules solution** - Next by thread:
**Re: T -> Scheme** - Index(es):