[racket] Macros as a first class objects?

From: Noel Welsh (noelwelsh at gmail.com)
Date: Fri Aug 13 05:45:38 EDT 2010

Such a system would be very hard to understand and very hard to make
efficient, IMO. You will find people who argue in favour of it, and
searching for first class macros should turn up some hits.


On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 10:31 AM, The Configurator
<configurator at gmail.com> wrote:
> There must be great reasons why this would be horribly wrong, but why
> shouldn't macros and syntaxes be passed as first class objects, method
> parameters, return values etc.?
> Note that I'm asking why it shouldn't and not why it's not. I'm talking
> about the theoretical possibility, not an actual implementation.

Posted on the users mailing list.