Re: Macros: Scheme vs Common Lisp

Craig> Sorry about the formatting. Apparently, there was some Craig> lossage between XEmacs and Eudora. "Doctor, it hurts when I do this." Craig> I think I see what you're driving at, but I'm not sure that Craig> it's as important as it's being made out to be. It's easy Craig> enough to use MAKE-SYMBOL to create safe variable names for Please, tell the authors of the Mule Lisp code that. Then get a baseball bat and stand over them until they fix it. Legacy code is a problem. Legacy coders are a bigger problem. :-) What's "easy enough" for you is considered a Royal PITA by others. And what you are suggesting is basically requiring the programmer to do what a hygenic macro facility does automatically. No? "Machines are disciplined, people are creative." Craig> the macro and still maintain readability. It's also easy Craig> enough to expand (via MACROEXPAND) the macro to see what it Craig> will look like (Zmacs will let me do this with Craig> control-shift-M and meta-shift-M). [...] Craig> Expanding the macro should tell you everything that you Craig> need to know. If there are dynamically-scoped variables, you need to map over all possible closures.... -- University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences Tel/fax: +1 (298) 53-5091