This talk of "Scheme macros" is a little weird: are we talking syntax-case, explicit-renaming, or unhygienic defmacro? Scheme has them all.
There are also implementation-specific mechanisms for writing reader macros: what's left? On Dec 3, 2011, at 14:57, Stuart Sierra <the.stuart.sie...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think that Common Lisp macros are, strictly speaking, more powerful than > Scheme macros, but I don't have a citation. > > -S > > -- > 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 -- 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
