[racket-dev] generalized `begin-for-syntax'

From: Eli Barzilay (eli at barzilay.org)
Date: Thu Sep 8 17:48:46 EDT 2011

50 minutes ago, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> The `begin-for-syntax' form in v5.1.3.7 supports variable and macro
> definitions within a module for all phases N >= 0 (finally!).


Does this mean that `define-for-syntax' becomes as deprecated as
`require-for-syntax' etc, right?

Also, does `provide' work fine in a `begin-for-syntax'?

Assuming that it is, it could have been nice to have it called just
`for-syntax', since

  (for-syntax (require foo))

becomes equivalent to

  (require (for-syntax foo))

          ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
                    http://barzilay.org/                   Maze is Life!

Posted on the dev mailing list.