Subject: Re: Macro-writing in CL From: Erik Naggum <email@example.com> Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 15:04:59 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> * "Biep @ http://www.biep.org/" <email@example.com> > Erik, would you please go away? No, "Biep @ http://www.biep.org/". It is mot my fault that you expose your ignorance and your arrogance about what you do not understand. You are one of those who think they have nothing more to learn and instead spend your time blaming what you have not studied for the fact that you do not understand it properly. It has been obvious for quite a while that you are here only to talk, not to listen, not to learn, not to appreciate contrary opinions and views. I suggest that you retreat to your Scheme world and enjoy yourself instead of wasting your time here, being as you are the one to suggest that people go away. You are making a problem look much harder than it is because you have failed to understand it. It behooves a critic to be well educated. You are not in the topic at hand. Maybe you are so "educated" in other things you actually believe you do not have to know specifics, anymore, but then that is the problem in this debate, not the issues at hand. Just write the macros that produce the effects you want. Publish them. It is actually that is. The fact that you can is the strength of the Common Lisp macro system. The fact that you _cannot_ do this in a syntactic closures system is a weakness of that system. The fact that you might have to is not a blemish or a weakness of a language that was expressly designed to let people build their own tools within it. If you want a language that _enforces_ what you think is right, that language is not Common Lisp, and the community you should talk to is not the Common Lisp community. #:Erik -- Travel is a meat thing.