[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: propositions, oppositions, and some minor details

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 57 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 57 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

On Wed, 15 Sep 2004, Felix Winkelmann wrote:

>What if file a.scm defines a macro that file b.scm uses (by refering
>to syntax defined in a module declared in a.scm)?

I regard the difficulty compiling this construction separately,
as evidence from God that Scheme, having abandoned the first-class,
mutable, storable, runtime code transforming macro, has fallen
short of the grace of LISP and uses the wrong macrology.

But we don't want to get into *that* mess, so I'll just point
to Flatt's "composable and compilable macros" as a tolerable
compromise - although it breaks true separate compilation.