On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 5:07 PM, Houman Zolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would be nice to understand the value of this optimisation, or
alternatively the cost of what we are trying to improve.
In given the example, what do we save exactly? Is it the creation of
the closure when we evalulate
There seems to be a lot of confusion in the Chicken
community, and the Lisp community in general, about the
different macro systems, so I thought provide some
background information and discussion of the eggs available
in Chicken and their uses.
--- Background ---
There are two completely
Alaric Snell-Pym scripsit:
Syntax-rules is handy for simple stuff, but I'd hate for it to be the
only macro system I had - I like to think of it as a shorthand for a
reasonably common case, TBH.
I think quite otherwise: I would never write a macro in any system other
than syntax-rules -- all
On 4 Apr 2008, at 4:22 pm, John Cowan wrote:
Alaric Snell-Pym scripsit:
Syntax-rules is handy for simple stuff, but I'd hate for it to be the
only macro system I had - I like to think of it as a shorthand for a
reasonably common case, TBH.
I think quite otherwise: I would never write a
On 04/04/2008, Alaric Snell-Pym [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...but I'm just lazy ;-) I think I'm going to bite the bullet and
install riaxpander and use er+match for everything, in the hope that
if enough momentum builds up around that, it'll become the de-facto
standard and there will be no
Alaric Snell-Pym scripsit:
I think quite otherwise: I would never write a macro in any system
other than syntax-rules -- all other macro systems strike me as
standing on a foundation of quicksand.
Oooh, interesting!
Pray tell?
I suppose that syntax extension is one thing, arbitrary
