[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] Bug report: low-level macros vs. variables in csi
From: |
John Cowan |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] Bug report: low-level macros vs. variables in csi |
Date: |
Sat, 15 Mar 2008 15:03:44 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) |
Felix Winkelmann scripsit:
> Macros are not first class, like procedures. Low-level macros
> in general do not actually fit that well into Scheme's semantics.
Are you saying (or rather implying) that it's too expensive to insert a
check for low-level macro names in funky places into eval? It certainly
sounds straightforward to me.
> This situation is slightly less problematic in Lisp-2's (which
> still has the same problem).
In effect, native Chicken without an expander is partly a Lisp-2.
--
John Cowan <address@hidden>
http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
.e'osai ko sarji la lojban.
Please support Lojban! http://www.lojban.org