Neil Jerram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > We could certainly do this, but I think I remember a thread where it was > suggested that we treat any occurrence of a macro in non-car position as > an error - which would catch the problem more generally.
I suppose it depends if a macro should be a first class object to be thrown around (or do I misunderstand?). I've been gradually converting srfi-1 procs to C, which has the side effect of checking the procs are actual procedures. I suppose there must be plenty of ordinary application code passing procedures around in exactly the same way that's vulnerable to memoizing macros. (Could a memoized form check it's got the same macro as originally expanded, as a safety check? Or do I misunderstand again?) _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user
