Wing Hei Chan

Hi, a few comments here if you don't mind. 1. I don't think we still need the variable `len` if we are not bothering with `ivy-completion-in-region-action`. We also don't need...

This appears to be a somewhat intended behavior, because `splicing-parameterize` is “splicing” like `begin`, unless it’s in an expression context (try wrapping it in `#%expression`!). It’s the same as if...

Yes, that’s the straightforward way (“inline the `lambda` with the body”). Ideally, the change should not change the behavior of existing code, say by requiring an `#:aggressive` directive (and the...

The last commit adds an example file that uses `elpaca-thunk` in a way that will fail for `elpaca` once compiled. The interpreted and compiled semantics should stay identical, except that...

Compiler macro cannot solve the problem, because they are for implementing *optimizing* semantics for *functions*. Here we want an alternative semantics altogether, not simply optimizing (i.e. observationally equivalent). Moreover, even...

Phase mismatch will expose the difference in behavior, as is the case with `elpaca{,-thunk}`. Consider #161 again: ```emacs lisp (eval-after-load 'foo '(foo-macro ...)) ``` This works for interpreted, but not...

Can we keep this open to track the issue?

The original issue is solved by the addition of use-site scopes in enforestation, so I’m closing this. > To my understanding, `syntax-local-introduce` is not a reliable way to break hygiene...

I think a `check`-like macro (as used internally in Racket) can also be a good idea, and relates to `who` because both are inspired by Racket-internal macros.

This seems to be a more general problem, because the following program ``` #lang rhombus class Secret(secret): nonfinal constructor (): super("not secret") class TopSecret(): extends Secret ``` doesn’t trigger any...