do...until wisdom needed...

[Dave LeBlanc]

I've always thought that programming with Lisp was a lot like trying
to make rope out of ((((((jello)))))).

Dave LeBlanc

On 16 Apr 2001 19:53:18 -0400, Douglas Alan <nessus at mit.edu> wrote:

>"Alex Martelli" <aleaxit at yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> "Douglas Alan" <nessus at mit.edu> wrote in message
>
>> > "Alex Martelli" <aleaxit at yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> > > Exact syntax sugar could be endlessly (and fruitlessly) debated, but
>> > > the general idea might be:
>
>> > Python should have procedural macros like Lisp.  Then whenever anyone
>> > asks a question about why Python doesn't have syntactic feature xyzzy,
>> > the answer can always be, "You can already do what you want by loading
>> > the following macro...."
>
>> Yes, 'hygienic macros' WOULD help cut these discussions short.  Pity
>> this benefit (basically restricted to c.l.p) would be balanced by
>> the productivity loss engendered by the actual existence of such
>> macros in the language -- a language which may have ANY 'syntactic
>> feature' ensures any given program is impossible to understand
>> unless you first study the exact set of macros used by its
>> author:-).
>
>What happened to giving programmers enough rope to hang themselves?
>What happened to the desire for flexibility and expressive power?
>
>Sure, macros are a long rope, but some tasks require a long rope.
>Take a look at Guy Steele's maxim that a large language is impossible
>to design well, but a small language is doomed to die.  A language
>needs to be able to grow over time.  Procedural macros in Lisp allowed
>Lisp to continue to evolve over time, so that even though it was
>invented in the '50's, it remains today one of the most modern of
>languages.  It was able to do this, in part, by allowing every user to
>experiment with adding language features, not just the language
>Illuminati.
>
>And macros don't ensure that *any* given program is impossible to
>understand -- it only helps nutty programmers make programs that are
>impossible to understand.  Conversely, macros can help wise
>programmers in making programs that are shorter, easier to understand,
>easier to code, and easier to maintain.
>
>|>oug