[racket] Why internal definitions?

From: Grant Rettke (grettke at acm.org)
Date: Thu Nov 17 09:20:05 EST 2011

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 8:16 AM, Jim Wise <jwise at draga.com> wrote:
> On the other hand, the ~corresponding let form shows very clearly the
> scope of the newly-bound identifiers (and most editors make it very easy
> to highlight the whole let form in one swoop), which I've found useful
> in explaining lexical scope.

One of the fun exercises is to learn how to implement let using
lambda; guessing that internal define would be a bit more work and
less interesting ear ly on.

Posted on the users mailing list.