Re: [racket] Formal Presentation and initial doubts.

About two weeks ago, Daniel Prager wrote: > > Does… CL have a pattern-based macro syntax like syntax-rules? > > Not buit-in. It does have a way of doing something similar to patterns, though less sophisticated -- the argument list of a macro is actually used with `destructuring-bind', so you can

Re: [racket] Formal Presentation and initial doubts.

On 03/23/2014 12:34 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote: > > On Mar 22, 2014, at 10:58 PM, Daniel Prager wrote: > >> How to Design Macros. > > > Yes, we need it and from the private emails I got I take it that my > email outlined it reasonably well. I'll put it on my stack -- Matthias This is awesom

Re: [racket] Formal Presentation and initial doubts.

On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 3:34 AM, Matthias Felleisen wrote: > > > Yes, we need it and from the private emails I got I take it that my email > outlined it reasonably well. I'll put it on my stack -- Matthias > > +1. I found your email very informative in clarifying the arguments for the current syst

Re: [racket] Formal Presentation and initial doubts.

On Mar 22, 2014, at 10:58 PM, Daniel Prager wrote: > How to Design Macros. Yes, we need it and from the private emails I got I take it that my email outlined it reasonably well. I'll put it on my stack -- Matthias Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users

Re: [racket] Formal Presentation and initial doubts.

I'm interested in a layered approach to learning the macro system, which makes a lot of sense from a learning point of view. I was able to get Matthias's example(s) to work with the aid of DrRacket and a little guesswork (at the level of pattern-matching) to fix the typos, and trivially extended i

Re: [racket] Formal Presentation and initial doubts.

On Mar 22, 2014 3:44 AM, "Daniel Prager" wrote: > > > Does… CL have a pattern-based macro syntax like syntax-rules? > > Not buit-in. > > > If not, it seems surprising to argue that lisp macros would be easier to learn. Can you give examples? > > The explanation of CL macros and their application i

Re: [racket] Formal Presentation and initial doubts.

Konrad Hinsen wrote at 03/22/2014 07:15 AM: --On 22 mars 2014 04:18:03 -0400 Neil Van Dyke wrote: One tip for writing macros: make your transformer pattern variables be all-uppercase. This convention makes reading and writing macros much easier for humans, and also less confusing to learn (bec

Re: [racket] Formal Presentation and initial doubts.

--On 22 mars 2014 04:18:03 -0400 Neil Van Dyke wrote: One tip for writing macros: make your transformer pattern variables be all-uppercase. This convention makes reading and writing macros much easier for humans, and also less confusing to learn (because people seeing examples are less confuse

Re: [racket] Formal Presentation and initial doubts.

Neil Van Dyke wrote at 03/22/2014 04:18 AM: So why not just start with "syntax-parse" or "syntax-rules", Oops, I meant "syntax-parse" or "syntax-case". Neil V. Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users

Re: [racket] Formal Presentation and initial doubts.

Welcome to Racket, Alejandro. The different Racket macro tools are harder to learn than CL's. But once you invest in learning the Racket ones, in my experience, they feel much more sophisticated than CL's. Macros are easily one of Racket's biggest strengths over other languages. There are

Re: [racket] Formal Presentation and initial doubts.

> Does... CL have a pattern-based macro syntax like syntax-rules? Not buit-in. > If not, it seems surprising to argue that lisp macros would be easier to learn. Can you give examples? The explanation of CL macros and their application in On Lisp s

Re: [racket] Formal Presentation and initial doubts.

Will has some bits right and quite a few bytes wrong. 0. It is not about macros. It is about having a good API to the compiler. 1. It is not about hygiene alone. As John points out, there are other aspects of Racket's syntax extension system that make it easy, for instance pattern matching.

Re: [racket] Formal Presentation and initial doubts.

On Mar 21, 2014, at 3:49 PM, Daniel Prager wrote: > Thank-you for raising this topic. > > > I don't understand well its macros (are completely different for me than CL > > macros). > > Me neither. And I'm somewhat torn. The trade-off as I understand it is that > CL-style macros are *much* ea

Re: [racket] Formal Presentation and initial doubts.

Thank-you for raising this topic. > I don't understand well its macros (are completely different for me than CL macros). Me neither. And I'm somewhat torn. The trade-off as I understand it is that CL-style macros are *much* easier to learn, but prone to aliasing while hygenic macros are technical

Re: [racket] Formal Presentation and initial doubts.

Welcome. Why don't you take a look at Greg's macro write-up http://www.greghendershott.com/fear-of-macros/ and see whether this helps you wrap your head around macros. On Mar 21, 2014, at 9:48 AM, Alejandro Zamora Fonseca wrote: > Hi!! > My name is > Alejandro, i'm a Cuban Computer Sc

[racket] Formal Presentation and initial doubts.

Hi!! My name is Alejandro, i'm a Cuban Computer Scientist, new to Lisp(having 1 year using CL), and wishing change to Racket. I see the list and I hope make me a better Lisp programmer with your kindly help. I have Racket installed in my PC, I like the language and tools, but yet I don't unde