Matthias Neubauer wrote:

 > I don't get it either. I, for my part, I'm rather underwhelmed ...
 >
 > This all seems to bring us back to the "good old times" where there
 > was no real separation between code and data---this time, it just
 > happens "one stage further up" ...

 That is a rather different issue from whether syntax objects
 are opaque to list operations.  Syntax objects are data,
 whether they are opaque or not to list operations.

 I would consider the cross-stage persistence semantics you advocated
 a much better example of what it means to confuse the distinction
 between code and data.

 As you know from the namespaces thread, I am in fact advocating a
 stricter separation between code on the one hand, and data representing
 code at a different syntactic storey on the other hand, than is
 currently done in comparable Scheme macro systems.

 Cheers
 Andre