Re: Macros and expressivity

[Miles Bader <miles@...>]

Philippe Lhoste <PhiLho@GMX.net> writes:
>> Incidentally, any syntactic reason not to allow other "parenthesis-less"
>> calls?
>>
>> E.g., you can use:  fun 'blargh'
>> sometimes I'd kinda like to be able to use:  fun 3
>> as well...
>
> Perhaps because fun 3+4 would look ambiguous and error prone? Somehow,
> the quotes *are* the delimiters of the function parameter, so they are
> no ambiguous.

I dunno, I don't really see that as a problem -- just say it's exactly
the same as any unary operator, and binds tightly.  It's no different
than -3+4, or as somebody else mentioned, fun "a".."b".

-Miles

-- 
`To alcohol!  The cause of, and solution to,
 all of life's problems' --Homer J. Simpson