Re: Macros: Scheme vs Common Lisp
Rick Campbell <campbell(a)cyberpass.net> writes:
loop-finish is usually defined with macrolet and
"pollutes" the name
space (i.e. makes it non-hygienic), which is useful in this case.
Certainly, many people find the extended loop useful, but it's got to
be one of the ugliest, non-lispy parts of CL. I can't really see
trying to build an argument for much of anything around the fact that
the extended/MIT version of loop uses it.
But the syntax of loop doesn't have anything to do with the use of
loop-finish. I don't want to comment on the syntax of loop.
Come on, you wanted an *example*, here it is. ;-)
Many people find goto useful . . . .
What do you want to imply with that? How do you want to do tail
recursion optimization without goto? ;-)
Yours,
--
Clemens Heitzinger
Student der Techn. Mathematik, Technische Universität Wien, Österreich
Vienna University of Technology, Austria