Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.
| Related articles |
|---|
| Re: Scheme is not another C-like language? was Compilers :) gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2023-01-12) |
| Re: Scheme is not another C-like language? was Compilers :) nmh@t3x.org (Nils M Holm) (2023-01-12) |
| From: | Nils M Holm <nmh@t3x.org> |
| Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
| Date: | Thu, 12 Jan 2023 11:15:25 +0100 |
| Organization: | Compilers Central |
| Injection-Info: | gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="12337"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com" |
| Keywords: | Scheme, comment |
| Posted-Date: | 12 Jan 2023 13:39:26 EST |
Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> wrote:
> I tried (lambda () (define x 42) (define x 43)) in a Scheme
> implementation and got an error about the duplicate variable.
>
> That's completely silly since it breaks the idea that the block scoped
> define can just be desugared to nested lets.
If I am not completely mistaken, local DEFINE expands to LETREC
and not to nested LET, so your example would result in two
instances of X in the same scope:
(lambda ()
(letrec ((x 42)
(x 43))))
--
Nils M Holm < n m h @ t 3 x . o r g > http://t3x.org
[See the more complete analysis just posted. -John]
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.