Is this like the difference between C's type system and ML's? Racket allows for unhygienic macros so does Racket not implement a "hygienic macro system"?
On 11/23/2010 04:46 PM, David Herman wrote: > No. The problem is it's never been clear what that category of macros is that > John's talking about, but it does not violate hygiene. By definition, in a > hygienic macro system, there is no macro that can make the macro system > unhygienic. > > Now good luck trying to define what that category is! I worked on that > problem for nigh onto 8 years, and all I have to show for it is a > dissertation. > > Dave > > On Nov 23, 2010, at 1:59 PM, Jon Rafkind wrote: > >>>> Dave Herman mentioned this to me some time ago, and my immediate response >>>> was this: okay, if the term "hygiene" refers to a macro system and not to >>>> a macro, then *what word* should we use to describe macros that violate >>>> transparency? "non-transparent"? >>> Oh dear... would that word be "anaphoric"? >>> >> A macro that violates hygiene.. 'violator' >> _________________________________________________ >> For list-related administrative tasks: >> http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
