15 minutes ago, Markku Rontu wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 9:58 PM, Eli Barzilay <e...@barzilay.org> wrote:
> > (define-syntax (rapp stx)
> > (syntax-case stx ()
> > [(rapp f x ...) #`(f #,@(reverse (syntax->list #'(x ...))))]))
> > [...]
> >
> I would not call this piece of code much more obvious, it has too much line
> noise for my comfort :-)
Compare it with a symbolic version:
(define (rapp l)
`(,(cadr l) ,@(reverse (cddr l))))
it's not that far -- the extra noise is in converting between syntaxes
and lists. Had reversals been more common, we could add a simple
`reverse-list' function.
> > As an antidote to such illusions of black magic, here's another
> > version that doesn't even use `syntax-case':
> >
> > (define-syntax (rapp stx)
> > (let ([l (cdr (syntax->list stx))])
> > (datum->syntax stx (cons (car l) (reverse (cdr l))))))
> >
> Thanks anyway for these, they are more of what I was talking about.
> I do use "the full power of Racket" when writing my macros. Like
> introducing new names through string manipulation and
> syntax->datum and datum->syntax. Still that part usually looks ugly
> and un-Rackety to me. Have to ponder more why it feels so.
(Here's a guess: you see that `datum->syntax' and get a reflex
reaction of "bad, unhygienic code"...)
> > That is a social problem:
> > - There are many people who still think that macros are a bad idea
> > in general, and advocate that idea.
> > - From the peole who manage to get passed that propaganda line,
> > there are people who think that there's nothing wrong with plain
> > CPP-style textual macros, and advocate that idea.
> > - From the peole who manage to get passed that propaganda line,
> > there are people who think that symbolic macros are superior,
> > and advocate that idea.
> > - From the peole who manage to get passed that propaganda line,
> > there are people who think that `syntax-rules' are better since
> > they don't get phases, and advocate that idea.
> >
> Who else to praise the awesomeness of Racket macros and syntax-case
> and phase levels if not the Racket people? If you get them young
> then they might not need to pass all those filters :-)
I'm not objecting to that, of course -- I try my best... (The filters
are there though -- they're very real.)
--
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!
_________________________________________________
For list-related administrative tasks:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
