Re: rnrs records: shadows previous definition of `dummy-1a78708d3c9406a3'

On Sat, 23 May 2026, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <[email protected]> wrote:
> Olivier Dion <[email protected]> skribis:
>> Also, I think that psyntax should maybe do it's own recursive traversal
>> of the form for hashing.  That would avoid the issue that Tomas
>> mentionned with duplicated top-level identifiers.
>
> Recursive traversal could quickly become terrible though, making macro
> expansion even more expensive than it already is.

It would be proportional to the expanded form.  I don't think that this
would be a problem in general, since I think the hashing is only done on
top-level identifiers that are part of the matching syntax.  Only way to
know is to measure it I guess.  But perhaps there are better way of
generating top-level identifiers in a reproducible manner.

> There=E2=80=99s also the caveat that due to this kind of use cases, =E2=
=80=98hash=E2=80=99 &
> co. cannot be changed in a stable series because that=E2=80=99d indirectl=
y be an
> ABI break.

Yes since this would change symbol naming. That would definitely not be
part of the stable series.

Thanks,
Olivier
--=20
Olivier Dion