[racket] define-syntax-rule/id

Yesterday, Jon Rafkind wrote:
> 
> This is mostly straight-forward except that to get the right lexical
> scope for `get-x1' we need to do a little hack (by assuming the
> argument list has at least one thing in it). Of course the original
> macro could enforce such a property as well.

Why not use `stx' directly?

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