Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] inline-syntax and require-extension-for-syntax

[John Cowan]

Felix scripsit:

> 1) "require-extension-for-syntax"/"use-for-syntax", which does
>    the same as the often occurring idiom
> 
>      (begin-for-syntax (require-library FOO))
>      (import-for-syntax FOO)
> 
>    So this loads an extension and imports it, but at expansion time.

I don't usually commit this sort of remark, but it does occur to me
that if Chicken would just lift the restriction that makes `import` fail
if a module is not loaded, rather than quietly loading it behind the
scenes, it would not be necessary to pile feature upon feature in this
fashion: `import-for-syntax` would do it all.

-- 
John Cowan  address@hidden  http://ccil.org/~cowan
If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing
on my shoulders.
        --Hal Abelson