[racket] letoverlambda

From: Richard Cleis (rcleis at mac.com)
Date: Sat Nov 20 14:50:43 EST 2010

On Nov 20, 2010, at 12:25 PM, Jos Koot wrote:

> Having read some of the stuff, l am not impressed. Yes, in some cases we may
> want to introduce a binding not named in a macro call. Racket and R6RS
> (macro-case) do that very well. That for a beginner it is difficult to
> prepare unhegienic macros: jolly good! I have misused datum->syntax a couple
> of times, just to find out later that I did not need it realy (although I
> recognize that in some cases it may be usefull)
> Jos

My experiences are similar. On the few occasions that I have used unhymacs, I first wrote and debugged hymacs; this path allows macro novices like myself to see and justify (or not) the need for developing them into unhymacs. To me, good development environments provide 'complication stages' that can be clearly understood and encountered only when required.


Posted on the users mailing list.