RE: Expansion problem

Jos Koot <[email protected]> wrote:

> Things can be simplified I think.
>
> In addition:
> using cond in stead of if,
> you don't need begin and
> you can include definitions in the bodies
> (both in finish-expr ... and in body-expr ...)
> (...)
> (define-syntax do*
>  (syntax-rules ()
>   ((do* ((var init next) ...) (test) body-expr ...)
>    (do* ((var init next) ...) (test (void)) body-expr ...))

    OK, but you can do that only in Racket, not for any interpreter of  
Scheme, since (void) is not a function recognised by the Scheme  
standard. But thanks you for this information.

J.-M.


----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/[email protected]
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.