On Aug 14, 2009, at 12:12 AM, Chouser wrote: > That particular example may not have to be a macro at all: > > http://paste.lisp.org/display/75230
Wonderful! :) > I think people want reader macros for a couple different reasons. > Sometimes it's just to remove parens from a function or macro call." > > (sorry, finger slipped on the send button) > > Another rather different reason is to implement features that would > otherwise require manually escaped strings as was mentioned earlier. Speaking personally, the only reader macro I can think of I would actually use would be the units one. What makes that interesting is that you have to modify what the reader does with a token that almost already parses. I wouldn't be upset if I had to wrap an expression in some syntax but the downside to string quoting is mainly the editor. People don't seem to like putting raw SQL in their code either (I don't agree but whatever). > Perhaps these different desires can fulfilled with two different > constructs. The two being: 1. To remove parens from a function or macro call. You mean e.g. #" and #()? 2. To achieve DSLs that would screw up the reader, such as the units one? Or is there a better example? I halfway like the named readtable idea proposed by Richard Newman, but I have to admit I still feel uneasy for some reason. — Daniel Lyons --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
