Yo, On Fri, 2005-04-22 at 08:16 +1000, Kevin Ryde wrote: > 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?).
Occaisionally useful for introspection -- getting the macro's source, object-properties (like 'documentation), even digging in the source of a defmacro to get the procedure's docstring. A procedure has already-memoized code though, no? Shouldn't a macro only operate on non-memoized code? -- Andy Wingo http://wingolog.org/ _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user
