Re: syntax-local-binding

[David Kastrup]

Peter TB Brett <address@hidden> writes:

> It seems pretty clear to me that the only (debatable) downside to
> using Mark's implementation is that some definitions end up in the
> "wrong" module, while your implementation has several potentially
> *major* problems (including the necessity of providing universally
> unique gensyms) which Mark has managed to avoid.

Let me just repeat that I consider universally unique gensyms a recipe
for trouble.  Having a compiler _depend_ on creating unreproducible
output is going to be in the "not really fun" category for a _lot_ of
things.  I don't have much of a clue about the other differences.  But
this one _really_ comes at a dear price in its implications.

-- 
David Kastrup