Explanation of macros; Haskell macros

[Simon Taylor]

In article <m3ad7inran.fsf at javamonkey.com>, Peter Seibel wrote:
> [1] Even if the uses of macros *were* rare that's doesn't seem to be
> the correct metric to balance against the "costs" of macros. Normally
> we weigh costs versus benefits, right? So in a way, the higher
> non-Lispers estimate the "costs" of macros (need for an code-as-data
> syntax, interpreter built into the compiler, etc.), the higher they
> should estimate the benefits. At least if they give Lisp programmers
> *any* credit at all for making a rational choice in tool selection.
> Because Common Lispers love macros and find the benefits *far*
> outweigh the costs. But I guess you can explain that by assuming we're
> deluded.

No one is saying all Lispers are deluded (I hope).  There are plenty
of good ideas in Lisp, but I'd like to have them without losing the
advantages of static typing and syntax requiring minimal editor support.
Template Haskell is a good step in that direction.

Simon.