On Sep 10, 1:10 pm, lprefonta...@softaddicts.ca wrote: > Adam Burry <abu...@gmail.com> wrote .. > > > On Sep 9, 5:06 pm, alux <alu...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > But, @Luc > > > "pushing the advantage of Lisp > > > macros to the forefront is not obvious if the audience cannot compare > > > with another (good/simple) implementation they understand well." > > > > Thats why I want to use a nifty metaphor ;-) > > > Even your dumbest Java developer knows that javac (or ant, or maven, > > or Eclipse, or *something*) converts their source to JVM byte code. > > Finding a familiar example is not hard. > > ??? converting to byte code (machine instructions) has nothing to do with > macro processing... Macros can stand by themselves without being embedded > in a compiler (m4, ...) > > Or perhaps I miss understood your statement ?
It has everything to do with macro processing. Macros convert one expression into another. For example, depending on how your lisp is set up: (cond (case1 action1) (case2 action2) (case3 action3)) can map to: (if case1 action1 (if case2 action2 (if case3 action3 'nil))) What do you think the compiler does? Recall, the OP said: How do I describe what it is all about in this "Code is Data", and "Macros let you grow your own language towards the problem" stuff? Well, Java is data to javac. Adam -- 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