Jacqueline Firth

I added this one back when I was trying to get a bunch of gnarly list-processing code to fuse into nice loops, so the real value wasn't this specific refactoring...

I agree with this, and others have mentioned the possibility to me too. But I'd also like to keep Resyntax and `racket-mode` in sync when it comes to `require` tidying....

Ah, I was going off the description [here](https://www.racket-mode.com/#racket_002dtidy_002drequires) rather than actually installing `racket-mode` and seeing what it does, since I'm not an emacs user. What does it do if the...

Perhaps the three of us ought to standardize on a shared implementation? A minimal-dependency package that we all reuse would get rid of any inconsistency problems.

@greghendershott For Resyntax to reuse it, it would have to use syntax objects instead of plain datums. Resyntax relies on syntax properties and source locations in the inputs and outputs...

Monads seem somewhat less useful in a functional programming language that allows side effects, such as scheme, racket, or ocaml. I'd expect a standard monad interface to be a part...

I agree monads can still be useful in untyped code. With regards to how they could fit into racket2, I'm imagining one of two options: 1. There's a standard monad...

Recall also that a surface syntax change affects far more than just _editable_ code. Code snippets in markdown files, example code in Scribble docs, code snippets typed in mailing list...

I find it useful to use a `make-` prefix to distinguish between constructors that are generative (multiple calls with same arguments return different values) and constructors that aren't. So I...

I recommend squashing. They're only separate because Resyntax doesn't do multiple passes at once yet.