Re: [Chicken-users] Re: can you believe it? compile time vs. run time issues, again!

[felix winkelmann]

On 5/29/05, Peter Bex <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> That's the problem, it's often hard to keep track of all these switches and
> options that deal with macros, run-time vs compile-time etc.
> 

Yes, that's unfortunately true. But there are certain reasons for this:

1. Chicken is a batch-compiler - the separation of compile and run-tiime is
  more strict than in interpreters or in-core compilers.
2. Chicken supports two different not-quite-compatible macro systems
3. I'm trying hard not to include unneeded code into the final
library/executable.

The *common* situation is to have macros exclusively at compile time
(or in the interpreter) and not to use eval at run-time. That doesn't
mean that there
are not situations where a full blown eval might be useful, or where
macro-definitions are carried over into run-time. But the normal use of
Scheme's dynamic features is quite painless and more exotic things are
still possible (while being admittedly unintuitive and complicated
sometimes),
even though they need some obscure magic.


cheers,
felix