"I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean that it would always refer to the most recent version of syntax-rules * in the current module? Isn't that expected behavior? If you mean it would refer to the most recent version defined in any module, then that shouldn't be an issue, since they are/should be isolated."
The core is a module, right? At least in concept? And shouldn't you be able to modify something in another module when you need to, to fix bugs etc.? (Not that you'd be able to fix bugs in the core, necessarily. :-p )
"There's a bug with it right now, but I should be able to fix it. The environments get created properly, but when doing the actual lookup, it thinks the value is undefined when it isn't. That's pretty normal, since the interpreter is still missing lots of functionality."
It sounds almost like you shallowly copy the outer scope when you create a local scope, which means you miss out on later definitions made in the outer scope. Is this right? It's a pretty wild guess, and even if it is right, then I'm interested to know how you're shallowly copying arbitrary environment types. :-p
(EDIT: Oh, you've fixed this already. I'm just late to the game.)
Yes and yes. But there's supposed to be a clean separation between modules. If you assign to a variable, it assigns it in your module. If you want to assign to a different module, you need to be explicit, like so:
(import foo "foo.arc")
(= foo!bar 'qux)
So in order to assign to the core module, you would need something like built-ins* to access it:
"then I'm interested to know how you're shallowly copying arbitrary environment types. :-p"
Environments are just wrappers around Python's dict type, so I can use the copy() method to make a shallow copy. I might need to make my own custom copy function later, though. Arc tables are just annotated dicts, by the way. But Python lets me modify how classes behave, so for instance I should be able to get cons cells to work in a dict, even though they're mutable (and thus not normally allowed).
Hm... it shouldn't, no. Only global_env is copied, so Arc types wouldn't need to worry about copying. In the hypothetical case that I would need to copy them, I could coerce them into a table and then do a copy on that. This could all be done transparently, so Arc code wouldn't need to do anything.
global_env is treated specially because it's the base for all other modules: it contains the built-in functions that modules cannot create (at least not in Arc), and also the core functions in arc.arc for convenience.
There are other strategies I could use as well, like special-casing (assign) or similar, but I figured a shallow copy would be easiest.