<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"> <title></title> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> Vincent St-Amour wrote at 05/29/2011 09:07 AM:<br> <blockquote cite="mid:874o4dveo5.wl%25stamourv@ccs.neu.edu" type="cite"> <pre wrap="">macro-debugger/analysis/check-requires or the script version: macro-debugger/analysis/check-requires-script I used them in the past, and they work quite well. </pre> </blockquote> <br> That sounds promising.  Thanks!<br> <br> <br> Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote at 05/29/2011 09:02 AM: <blockquote cite="mid:BANLkTimKgq3ry5Aft6VdKWESNp775_DgxQ@mail.gmail.com" type="cite"> <pre wrap="">On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Jay McCarthy <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jay.mccarthy@gmail.com"><jay.mccarthy@gmail.com></a> wrote: </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">I assume that this comment means you know that Check Syntax isn't accurate, right? Not every macro records disappeared uses correctly, for example. </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""> More problematically, uses of `require' can have side effects, which Check Syntax of course doesn't know about.</pre> </blockquote> <br> In this case, I want to tidy up around 1,000 Racket source files with which I'm somewhat familiar, and I expect that Check Syntax would be able to do pretty much all of them fine.<br> <br> <div class="moz-signature">-- <br> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.neilvandyke.org/">http://www.neilvandyke.org/</a> </div> </body> </html>