Angel Faus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Speaking about macros, I renember reading somewhere something about
> Scheme hygenic macros, but i didn't really understood it.
>
> Do they solve the maintenance problems of Lisp macros? Would they be
> applicable to perl?
Scheme hygenic macros do a lot of the bookkeeping for you, so you
don't have to muck about with gensym and are generally safe. The
problem is (judging by what the Common Lisp types say, I don't have
experience in this area myself), sometimes you need to do things that
would be considered 'dangerous' and, unless the scheme implementation
you're working with has some none standard extensions giving a scheme
like C<defmacro>, you're up the well known creek without a paddle.
--
Piers
"It is a truth universally acknowledged that a language in
possession of a rich syntax must be in need of a rewrite."
-- Jane Austen?
