David Rush scripsit: > > # The language developed by working group 1 must include support for > > # macros and modules/libraries in a way that is appropriate for the > > # language's small size. > > Ah. Well the thing is that hygiene-breaking macro modularity looks (to > me at least) like it requires some way of staging the macro > evaluations - which almost certainly means something that looks a lot > like a module system.
I don't read that as requiring low-level or unhygienic macros. (As foof points out, some macro systems are both high-level and unhygienic, like C #defines.) > When I look at how the Haskell community has just zipped past Scheme, > I really have to wonder what we've been doing wrong. All the world's Haskell programmers will still fit in a 747, and if it crashed, nobody would notice. -- John Cowan [email protected] http://ccil.org/~cowan Half the lies they tell about me are true. --Tallulah Bankhead, American actress _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
