Scribit Jonathan S. Shapiro dies 23/01/2008 hora 15:12: > > Isn't loosing the ability to have real macros somewhat on the down > > side? > Oh no. Permanently eradicating the remotest possibility that some > bright soul might contrive to introduce a macro system is one of the > few genuinely positive points about shifting to an s-block syntax. In > the presence of a macro expansion system, human code inspection is > hopelessly compromised.
Have there been any formal study on this? A quick search through the existing litteratire didn't yield anything really interesting on the subject. On the other hand, there seem to have been quite some publications on the fact that OOP, by disseminating related code, makes code inspection harder. So isn't it just abstraction that, in some way, makes code inspection harder, because it needs the understanding of related code? Isn't it just a necessary cost to the benefits that abstraction provide? The question really puzzled me the few times your raised that objection to Lisp macros, because it deeply contradicts my (arguably short) experience with them. I've seen code that is hard to understand in every programming language I've come to read, but in all accounts, I found Lisp code more readable than, say, C++ or Java. But I only tried to understand code, not to audit it, so it may not be totally relevant. Curiously, Pierre Thierry -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] OpenPGP 0xD9D50D8A
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
