[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-hackers] cond-expand and syntax-rules on Chicken 4
From: |
John Cowan |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-hackers] cond-expand and syntax-rules on Chicken 4 |
Date: |
Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:47:01 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) |
Thomas Bushnell BSG scripsit:
> However, I think that it is certainly the case that syntax-rules should
> behave correctly, and it's really a syntax-rules bug here, seemingly,
> that keywords don't preserve their self-evaluating nature inside the
> syntax-rules context, which, if the language is going to have them at
> all, they should.
Keywords, properly so called, actually do preserve their self-evaluating
nature. But there's no way for the syntax-rules engine to recognize
that "chicken" is a keyword in this context. Cond-expand is unique
among macros, indeed, in that it has a completely unpredictable set
of identifiers which must be treated non-hygienically. Wrap it in a
syntax-rules macro at your peril.
> (For my part, I regard keywords as Common Lisp grot, and would be happy
> to seem them abandoned,
Amen.
--
John Cowan address@hidden http://ccil.org/~cowan
The penguin geeks is happy / As under the waves they lark
The closed-source geeks ain't happy / They sad cause they in the dark
But geeks in the dark is lucky / They in for a worser treat
One day when the Borg go belly-up / Guess who wind up on the street.