Re: '#:foobar versus (make-symbol "FOOBAR")

[dmg@goldilocks.LCS.MIT.EDU]

Reply to: mbr@breeze.bellcore.com (Mark Rosenstein)

	Ummm. Using a reader macro, could you get screwed by nested
	calls to the macro? With make-symbol, you are guarenteed to
	be getting a new symbol each time the macro is expanded, but
	with the reader macro, I think, you may only get one symbol
	per macro definition.


Yes, this is a good point, I was less than clear about the assumptions
I made.  On the subject of using #: for new local variables in macro
expansions, the scoping rules guarantee that this won't be a problem
since the result forms are nested as well (meaning LET will shadow
the binding of the symbol).  In this case, it should be clear that
using #: is more space efficient than using make-symbol, since
use of distinct symbols for nested bindings is unnecessary.

I did come across ONE screw case where nested non-hygenic macros 
caused a problem... but I can't remember what it was.  When I thougt
the problem out, I realized that I was on the wrong track anyway.

-david