Re: [Scheme-reports] Proposal to add fexprs

[musicdenotation@x]

Why is static analysis a problem? The compiler can tell whether something is a function or a macro by looking at it's source code. If it's from a library, look at the source code of a library or the library should flag whether a procedure is a function or a macro.
Anyway, you can specify fexprs as an optional part of the language, so that anyone interested can implement it.


---Original message---
From: John Cowan
Sent: Sat, 16 Nov 2013 15:10:09 -0500
To: vnikolov@x
Subject: Re: [Scheme-reports] Proposal to add fexprs


Vassil Nikolov scripsit:

>   (Common Lisp, and some other lisps, allow arbitrary functions to
>   be used to define macros, and it is entirely up to the programmer
>   to ensure that they don't "misbehave".  Scheme introduces certain
>   restrictions and so assumes some of that responsibility.)

Unfortunately, a Common Lisp macro programmer cannot prevent misuse,
no matter who cleverly their macros are written.  At most they can
only make it less likely.

-- 
John Cowan      cowan@x        http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
        Is it not written, "That which is written, is written"?

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@x
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@x
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports