On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 01:12:11PM -0800, Walter Bright wrote: > On 11/14/2013 11:40 AM, deadalnix wrote: > >This is not proposing to configure syntax. > > Right, it is about inserting arbitrarily different meaning into > existing syntax. [...] > Now, let's take the AST macros, and pass it "4+3". Apparently is a > feature that the macro can transform this to produce "hello" as the > result. The result is that although the language looks the same, > there is no "anchor" a person can rely on to indicate the meaning. > The meaning of "fine" is reversed, so to speak. [...] > On the other hand, with string mixins, it is immediately obvious > that one is dealing with different syntax, and so expect something > different to happen.
What if macros adopted an overtly different syntax? T -- English has the lovely word "defenestrate", meaning "to execute by throwing someone out a window", or more recently "to remove Windows from a computer and replace it with something useful". :-) -- John Cowan