[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Q. on backquote
- To: Sanjai Narain <narain@RAND-UNIX>
- Subject: Re: Q. on backquote
- From: Paul Hudak <Hudak@YALE.ARPA>
- Date: Fri ,25 Oct 85 10:10:42 EDT
- Cc: scheme@MIT-MC
- In-reply-to: Sanjai Narain <narain@rand-unix.ARPA>, 24 Oct 85 12:18:45 PDT (Thu)
...
Fundamentally, it is a question of what is the need to quote and
what is evaluation. Note that Prolog doesn't need to quote, neither
does the lambda calculus.
Please -- T/Scheme doesn't need to quote either -- one can usually
use closures to do what you want. It's just that macros are useful
for defining *syntax*, and there's no reason that Prolog designers
won't reach the same conclusion. Although I personally shy away from
using macros, they are generally viewed as a *feature* of Lisps, but
not necessarily fundamental to the language or its semantics.
-Paul