|
macroexpand SRFI?
Lassi Kortela
(03 Oct 2019 15:30 UTC)
|
|
Re: macroexpand SRFI?
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(03 Oct 2019 15:40 UTC)
|
|
Re: macroexpand SRFI?
Arthur A. Gleckler
(03 Oct 2019 18:43 UTC)
|
|
Re: macroexpand SRFI?
John Cowan
(03 Oct 2019 20:20 UTC)
|
|
Re: macroexpand SRFI?
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(03 Oct 2019 20:36 UTC)
|
|
Re: macroexpand SRFI?
Lassi Kortela
(04 Oct 2019 10:29 UTC)
|
|
Re: macroexpand SRFI?
Vladimir Nikishkin
(04 Oct 2019 07:45 UTC)
|
|
Re: macroexpand SRFI?
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(04 Oct 2019 08:14 UTC)
|
|
Re: macroexpand SRFI?
Shiro Kawai
(04 Oct 2019 10:11 UTC)
|
|
Re: macroexpand SRFI?
Shiro Kawai
(04 Oct 2019 10:14 UTC)
|
|
Re: macroexpand SRFI? Lassi Kortela (04 Oct 2019 14:17 UTC)
|
|
Re: macroexpand SRFI?
Amirouche Boubekki
(04 Oct 2019 09:18 UTC)
|
|
How hard is a portable macroexpand only for display purposes?
Lassi Kortela
(04 Oct 2019 10:26 UTC)
|
|
Re: How hard is a portable macroexpand only for display purposes?
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(04 Oct 2019 11:28 UTC)
|
|
Re: How hard is a portable macroexpand only for display purposes?
Lassi Kortela
(04 Oct 2019 14:13 UTC)
|
|
Re: How hard is a portable macroexpand only for display purposes?
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(04 Oct 2019 15:01 UTC)
|
> We have a few flavors of macroexpand-type API to help debugging, > but their results are just for information to humans and > not expected to be reused in the program---e.g. you can't always tweak the > result of macroexpand in Scheme > and then put it back to the compiler pipeline, like Common Lisp. I think that is perfectly fine :) It already helps a lot.
