Alex Knauth

I finally got this to work by wrapping the read functions from a separate module.

Can we have tuples instead?

Should it be possible to define "indentation rules" for non-macro bindings, like normal functions? For example, could a `call-with-input-file` function definition specify that its second argument (the function) should be...

I and other people are also working on alternatives that have a closer one-to-one correspondence with s-expressions

I think we should change the name of `hash-map` to something that doesn’t have the functor-map connotation. And then add a new function called `hash-map` that maps over just the...

Part of @rocketnia's proposal is a way to call functions using options to determine whether to use the default or not, but one question that arises is: what does it...

I think `_` should be special in that it's provided by Racket and can't be user-defined with the "normal" definition forms. But not so special that it can't be re-defined...

Being a syntax-parameter isn't necessary to be able to rename it... the current `_` binding provided by Racket isn't a syntax parameter, and it can still be renamed just fine.

I, Alex Knauth, give permission to license my contributions to Rash under MIT/Apache 2. I've used the email address alexander at knauth dot org.

A couple months ago I started to work on a new syntax proposal which would allow this two-way conversion. I don't like the existing non-s-exp syntax proposals very much because...