What I am demanding is consistency. You may as well eliminate macros: (lambda '(arg1 arg2 ...) expr)
On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 3:10 AM, John Cowan <[email protected]> wrote: > Vassil Nikolov scripsit: > > > (Common Lisp, and some other lisps, allow arbitrary functions to > > be used to define macros, and it is entirely up to the programmer > > to ensure that they don't "misbehave". Scheme introduces certain > > restrictions and so assumes some of that responsibility.) > > Unfortunately, a Common Lisp macro programmer cannot prevent misuse, > no matter who cleverly their macros are written. At most they can > only make it less likely. > > -- > John Cowan [email protected] http://www.ccil.org/~cowan > Is it not written, "That which is written, is written"? > > _______________________________________________ > Scheme-reports mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports >
_______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
