Re: [Scheme-reports] Proposal to add fexprs

[Brian Nguyen <musicdenotation@x>]

What I am demanding is consistency. You may as well eliminate macros: (lambda '(arg1 arg2 ...) expr)

On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 3:10 AM, John Cowan <cowan@x> wrote:

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