Neil Toronto : > This is what I was on about before. It seems to me that things would be > safer, if upon > (foomacro (nfx 1 + 1) ...) > nfx was expanded first, and then foomacro. Then foomacro wouldn't have > to care what nfx does, because foomacro always receives expanded > s-exprs. It fits my programmer intuition better as well: since I ALWAYS > expect postorder evaluation, why should I expect preorder macro expansion? > > Not that you're in a position to change anything. :)
Actually, that IS what I'm doing. By doing the transformation at read-time, I do the transformation BEFORE any macros run. --- David A. Wheeler ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Readable-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/readable-discuss
