From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Don't mix definitions and expressions in SRFI-9 Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 11:55:28 +0100 Message-ID: References: <8762rwqk2p.fsf@gmx.at> <87mxl77un3.fsf@gnu.org> <87d3m3n54h.fsf@vir.lan> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1299495681 17958 80.91.229.12 (7 Mar 2011 11:01:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 11:01:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= , guile-devel@gnu.org To: Andreas Rottmann Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 07 12:01:16 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PwYBg-0003zQ-Al for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2011 12:01:16 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49698 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PwY6G-0001XI-CZ for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2011 05:55:40 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=46248 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PwY69-0001Ut-Iu for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2011 05:55:34 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PwY68-0003bS-1m for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2011 05:55:33 -0500 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com ([64.74.157.62]:39613 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PwY67-0003bM-Vi; Mon, 07 Mar 2011 05:55:32 -0500 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7C6530E3; Mon, 7 Mar 2011 05:56:57 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=5kp65G7/qeqPfq+a2nyUTLzMh28=; b=eofShq 5ISvPZSBOCBN2WsRs+PFq3+fiIyj33JPemm/k5ynK3loHZgBlv/lh0gh9mgQt9mo 1883djzo7/+OqBpiox1Y3KQ/hKnUuLV0W7X8ue4YBF3VNA4nhtWfT4Bc3u9yjwXo xhjpIzg3W2MIumrMwkJdnNxsMhsglEAC8X8RA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=qNSahUrAR3A7sRLFqiAoETT/KpEbUFCs yVOR7UYnbKZpbavcekgE5DMGJzMq+45DJ2bs0UqcFfCYLvIaLNLddxnXHFdClfT7 S7e2Pvw89Qe3DrTfHUzLTcmVWOGALBz6iCMlwGONdqCmpBAPTvr40lqH/PyddJWL XTEtTu7kAXM= Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEA4C30E2; Mon, 7 Mar 2011 05:56:55 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from unquote.localdomain (unknown [90.164.198.39]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C9D0A30E1; Mon, 7 Mar 2011 05:56:52 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <87d3m3n54h.fsf@vir.lan> (Andreas Rottmann's message of "Mon, 07 Mar 2011 01:31:10 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 9DE94668-48A9-11E0-A4D4-AF401E47CF6F-02397024!a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 64.74.157.62 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:11806 Archived-At: On Mon 07 Mar 2011 01:31, Andreas Rottmann writes: > I have a testing framework (built upon Riastradh's trc-testing), which > uses R6RS `eval' to load testcases. Since `eval' does not allow for > the code to be evaluated to be in a top-level context, I'm using this: > > (eval `(let () ,@code-to-be-tested) the-environment-for-the-code) It would seem that if we followed the spec strictly -- not an approach that I think is sensible -- you may not use R6RS `eval' to define record types. Regards, Andy -- http://wingolog.org/