Racket has a much more advanced macro system than scheme's traditional syntax-case.
Re:Typed Lisp, a Primer (2019)
by zelphirkalt on Monday July 20, 2020 @04:17AM
(#23895779)
Yes, it certainly has, but I think it's still based on that traditional syntax-case stuff. So in theory other Schemes could perhaps copy it, if anyone can get all the macrology behind it.
Also in theory it should be possible to express all the advanced Racket stuff in syntax-case.
Do you think it is not possible to express these things in syntax-case? And if so, why?
With my typing trouble I should have come to the user list and asked, but I dId not, frustrated and thinking I was too stupid to get it ^^'
I did once at least see a question on the mailing list, where the answer was, that typed racket could not do it, as in infer types, so it might not be perfect yet, or perhaps it did improve since then.
I wish more Schemes could just copy the typed part of typed racket, using that macro language, as in theory they should be able to represent it, but I guess the devil is in the detail and slightly different workings of macro facilities.