[r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Trivial Enhancement of macros in v5.91: capture-syntax

[AndrevanTonder]

On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, William D Clinger wrote:

> Yes, they would be non-generative, but with the draft
> R6RS that is expressed by using a symbol.  With the
> separated binding, invoke-separately-for-each-phase
> semantics, an L1-symbol is not an L0-symbol.

Or are they ;-)  Presumably symbols themselves cannot be implemented
as a non-generative record type without running into a circularity
issue, so I guess they must either be generative or truly primitive.  But
I don't think they can be generative, since the draft says "two symbols are 
identical (in the sense of eq?, eqv? and equal?) if and only if their names are 
spelled the same way", which I interpret to imply that an L1-symbol must indeed 
be eq? to an L0-symbol with the same spelling, assuming both are 
covered by the r6rs term "symbols".  As another consequence, I infer from 
the section on equality predicates that the corresponding strings obtained via 
symbol->string must be string=?.

Cheers
Andre