In article <lc66g2edaf.fsf at gaffa.mit.edu>, Douglas Alan <nessus at mit.edu> wrote: . . . >Kind of. Except God is in the details. Tcl is slow and its semantics >are messy. None of this applies to hygienic procedural macros. >Hygiene keeps the semantics clean, the macros run at compile-time -- >not at run-time, and the code that is being treated as data has >structure -- it's not just a string. Also, procedural macros are >designed to be used sparingly, not for everything. > >|>oug While I shan't quibble about several details on which I think reasonable people can disagree, I do think it's important to combat the misconception that idiomatic Tcl is rife with mysterious macro-like things. This is NOT true, although it's widely-enough believed to have inspired a comp.lang.tcl thread just this morning. Yes, there have been times when procedural macros became unjustifiably fashionable in Tcl. We're past that now. -- Cameron Laird <claird at NeoSoft.com> Business: http://www.Phaseit.net Personal: http://starbase.neosoft.com/~claird/home.html
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4