Subject: Re: define-syntax must be followed by syntax-rules ??
From: (Rob Warnock)
Date: 2000/01/10
Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme
Message-ID: <85ca1i$>
Barry Margolin <> wrote:
| A Common Lisp-like macro system is considered *too* powerful
| by many Scheme proponents.

Though certainly not all. Myself, the very first thing I do when I
come across a new Scheme implementation is find out what sort of
low-level macro facility there is, then define CL-style "defmacro"
in it (if it's not already there), and then forget the idiosyncratic
system and just do everything with "defmacro"... but YMMV.

[By the way, one can have it both ways: There's an implementation
of Scheme's hygenic macros in terms of "defmacro" in SLIB...]

| It would allow you to violate lexical scoping, which they
| consider sacred.

Unless you *like* anaphoric macros...  ;-}


Rob Warnock, 8L-846
Applied Networking
Silicon Graphics, Inc.		Phone: 650-933-1673
1600 Amphitheatre Pkwy.		FAX: 650-933-0511
Mountain View, CA  94043	PP-ASEL-IA