[racket] why do I get undefined , when using internal definition?

15 minutes ago, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
> Unless I'm being stupid at this hour, I think you've found a bug: either 

No.


> it should work as you originally expected, or it should raise an
> error to complain about an internal "define" referencing itself like
> that and ignoring the pre-existing binding from the argument.

An error would be nice, but racket never did that.  Same as `letrec'.


> Just between you and me, I never use internal "define".  I came from
> RnRS, where "define" was only used at top level,

(??)


> and top level is fraught with witchcraft.

(That, it is.)

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