On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe <
stefan.itampe@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> 2. I was actually hesistant to call this srfi-72 because of trying to
> do what it want
>    more than what it say's. A main trick to simulate the effect was to
> introduce
>    a closure in the syntax at one point and therefore a choose the name
>    syntax-closure not knowing that there is an already a notion of
> that in the wild
>

Oh - I thought you were referring to the existing syntactic-closures.
I guess it's a plausible enough name to reuse coincidentally...

Carry on then :)

-- 
Alex