On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 03:46:16AM -0700, Robert Ransom wrote: > It was (at least in that paragraph). See my reply to your other message > for three examples of useful SYNTAX-RULES macros; SYNTAX-RULES cannot > be implemented properly without a hygienic macro system. I don't think > you would actually object to having a hygienic macro system and > SYNTAX-RULES *along with* the full compilation-at-compile-time > functionality of Common Lisp macros. that sounds fine, of course - but can't you implement hygienic macros on top of the usual gensym (provided, as it is, that it won't be eq to any other symbol)?
Regards, Mate
