2010/11/3 Tim Daly <d...@axiom-developer.org>: > > > On 11/2/2010 12:38 PM, Laurent PETIT wrote: >> >> 2010/10/30 Tim Daly<d...@axiom-developer.org>: >>> >>> Macros in lisp get used for three general purposes, at least >>> in my experience. >>> >>> The first purpose is efficiency. In common lisp you will find >>> that you can generate very machine-efficient (aka optimized >>> fortran level) binary instruction sequences if you add type >>> information. This gets tedious to do in code so you write a >>> macro. So (+ x y) has to assume that x and y are anything, >>> including non-numeric. If you write a (plus x y) macro it >>> can expand to >>> (the fixnum (+ (the fixnum x) (the fixnum y))) >>> which I have seen optimized into a single machine instruction. >>> Macros could be used to solve the boxing/unboxing issues in >>> Clojure. >> >> For writing DSLs, consider the excellent speak of cgrand at the conj : >> (not= DSL macros) >> >> Here are the slides: http://speakerrate.com/talks/4895-not-dsl-macros > > Yes, I saw the slides. I disagree with the speaker, at least, from > what I could see from the slides.
If you could argument more, this could be the start of an interesting thread ... -- 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 Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. 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
