This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Guile project.
Re: Reintroducing old `defined?'
Mikael Djurfeldt <email@example.com> writes:
> > You can take my defmacro's when you pry my cold, dead fingers off the
> > keyboard.
> :) There will be a time for that debate when we have a low-level
> implementation of syntax-case macros, but here is some PR:
I was (halfway) joking ;^)
> Actually, in the large majority of cases it's *much* simpler to write
> syntax-case macros than defmacros, and what is great about them is
> that they work. They don't cause strange unexpected errors due to
> identifier collisions.
Yes, that has always been the promise.
> Many people got scared of hygienic macros after seeing the low-level
> macro facility in R4RS. In addition to providing the easy-to-use
> high-level facility from R5RS (`syntax-rules'), syntax-case macros
> also support *easy-to-use* low-level power!
But how do I learn them? I have a lovely learning device for
defmacro's, Graham's 'On Lisp', but I couldn't find anything about how
to pick up syntax-case.
> Also, syntax-case macros integrate naturally with a
> module-system---they don't insert undefined bindings into the
> caller's code.
I lost you here.
The Feynman problem solving Algorithm:
1. Write down the problem. 2. Think real hard. 3. Write down the answer
-- Murray Gell-mann in the NY Times