> This seems like a reasonable restriction for Clojure too. Third rule. Macros break the rules. Don't place arbitrary restrictions on rule breaking :P
s_P On Dec 19, 2:05 pm, Stuart Halloway <stuart.hallo...@gmail.com> wrote: > According to Paul Graham's On Lisp, macroexpanders should be purely > functional, and you should not count on how often a macro gets > expanded. This seems like a reasonable restriction for Clojure too. > However, Chouser posted an example that shows the expansion of proxy > does have a side effect [2]. > > Should macros written by ordinary mortals follow PG's rule? If not, > should this be listed as a difference from other Lisps at [3]? > > Stuart > > [1]http://www.paulgraham.com/onlisp.html. Free download, see > discussion in 10.3. > [2]http://paste.lisp.org/display/72406 > [3]http://clojure.org/lisps --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
