[REBOL] Re: lisp-like backquotes macros
From: volker:nitsch:gmai:l at: 26-Nov-2005 4:41
On 11/26/05, Henri Morlaye <henri.morlaye-gmail.com> wrote:
> This example comes out of a real problem I have, it is not artificial
> (it may not be good rebol however ).
>
Then i was to harsh, sorry.
Ladislavs site is currently down, he mentioned some domai-rename in
another post.
Googled and found a %build.r here:
http://www.pat665.free.fr/gtk/rebol-core.html#sect22.
(for the few hours until he fixes that)
> Parens are also used to prioritize calculus, so every time I want to
> build a function block, there is a clash between priorities parens and
> compose parens.
>
> --
> henri
>
> On 11/26/05, Volker Nitsch <volker.nitsch-gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 11/26/05, Henri Morlaye <henri.morlaye-gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > > Am I the only one who find the lispy backquote macros better than the
> > > COMPOSE function ?
> > >
> > > for example:
> > > `[ ,value1 to-string ( to-integer ,value2 ) + 2 ) ]
> > > instead of:
> > > compose/deep [ (value1) to-string (to-paren reduce[ to-paren reduce [
> > > 'to-integer (value2) ] + 2 ] ]
> > >
> > > Why is it so ?
> >
> > Because you used an artificial example?
> > Parens *are* the backquotes of rebol.
> > What happens if you want to backquote backquotes in lisp?
> > (I admit in some cases, like composing parse-rules, your example makes
> > sens
> > e.).
> >
> > > --
> > > henri
> > > --
> > > To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to
> > > lists at rebol.com with unsubscribe as the subject.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > -Volker
> >
> > "Any problem in computer science can be solved with another layer of
> > indirection. But that usually will create another problem." David
> > Wheeler
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to
> > lists at rebol.com with unsubscribe as the subject.
> >
> >
> --
> To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to
> lists at rebol.com with unsubscribe as the subject.
>
--
-Volker
Any problem in computer science can be solved with another layer of
indirection. But that usually will create another problem.
David
Wheeler
