[racket-dev] implicit begin for define-syntax-rule

Just now, Marijn wrote:
> 
> Yes, that is indeed what I meant.
> 
> I wanted to benefit from being able to use multiple forms as in
> lambda,

The problem is which if the two `begin' features you want -- splicing
of definitions or sequencing side effects...


> but on second thought I guess this would conflict with `begin'
> having a different meaning in macro templates than it does in
> function bodies... I should prolly also rethink whether I didn't
> mean `(let () ...)' in my code...

That would destroy being able to use it for definitions that should be
visible outside of the macro.

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