[bitc-dev] CLEANUP: specification of DEFINE

[Jonathan S. Shapiro]

On Thu, 2008-07-17 at 15:29 -0400, Swaroop Sridhar wrote:
> So, this change means that
> 
> (define f ...) is a let form

Yes, except that it does not introduce a new, lexically nested scope
when it appears at top level.

> (define (f x) ... ) is a letrec form right?

Yes, which is the way the derived form is now specified; it just hasn't
propagated to the web site yet.

> I have no problem with this interpretation.

Good! How much problem do you anticipate with implementing the
change? :-)


shap