From: Tomasz Wegrzanowski <tomasz.wegrzanowski@...>
Date: 2006-07-26T03:34:35+09:00
Subject: Re: RLisp - Lisp naturally embedded in Ruby

On 7/25/06, Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Tomasz Wegrzanowski" <tomasz.wegrzanowski@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On 7/25/06, Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Personally, I'd prefer setf.
> >
> > Is setf used like that in any Lisp ?
>
> Does Common Lisp count? :)

Yeah, but setf changes variables in outside scope.
(setf a 2)
(defun foo ()
  (setf a 3)
  a
)
(foo) ; -> 3
a ; -> 3

I think it would be a huge win if variables were local to
the nearest lambda (or equivalent) by default, just like in Ruby.

> >> BTW, did you consider adding hygienic macros?
> >
> > I couldn't understand them from the standard, and Paul Graham
> > keeps saying that they're horrible, so I wasn't very inclined to try :-)
> >
> > Can you show some examples where they are better ?
>
> Have a look at this:
> http://people.csail.mit.edu/jhbrown/scheme/macroslides04.pdf

Thanks, it is very interesting.