[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Python and Lua
- From: "Michael T. Richter" <mtr@...>
- Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 13:14:20 -0400
> Thanks to Michael for the Dylan review. Think I'll steer clear of Dylan
> for the time being! Too many macros scare me, I like to see nice explicit
> code in front of me. I suppose its for the same reason I havent got
> round to studying the C++ STL yet. How do you debug templates?!
Dylan macros are *NOTHING* *AT* *ALL* like the evil C/C++ macros. They're
more like what are called macros in Common Lisp (from whence Dylan inherits
most of what it is outside of syntax) or the later versions of Scheme.
Think of them as special forms of subroutines with the ability to add new
keywords to the language instead.
Really, in actual practice, Dylan macros are no different from Lua tag
methods. They allow you to change the semantics of the language to be more
natural for specific purposes. Poorly used they can be brain-damaging (in
both Lua tags and Dylan macros). Used judiciously they can be wondrous
(witness DUIM as a perfect example).
I've been hobby-programming Dylan for just under a year now. I've never
actually written my own macros (except as learning experiences). I've
*used* dozens of them. Many times I'm not even aware I'm using them,
they're that native.
> Ahhh but that [libraries and modules] is exactly what I am interested
> in seeing!!
I must confess that this is part of Lua I find weakest as well. Still, Lua
is a relatively young language that's only just now getting attention.
Python and Perl-<spit> have been around for a long time and have as a result
accumulated a lot of good tools.