Hygienic macros
Hi
The following text was found in Hygienic macro, but I don't know enough about Scheme to integrate properly. Please could someone else handle this:
Scheme macros
- Transforms derived expression types into primitive expression types.
- During expansion, no evaluation ? rewrites one pattern of code into another.
- May use macros if we want to ommit Scheme?s call by value evaluation
DJ Clayworth 15:28, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)
It is unfortunate that hygienic macro redirects to Scheme programming language where there's only little information on the subject. MH 15:29, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Most of the advantages listed stem from more general design decisions than that of Scheme in particular:
- Concerning syntax it's a feature of all Lisps (well, except for the very first design of Lisp which did not use S-exprs)
- Concerning the functional aspect, it is as the name suggests common to all functional languages.
I've therefore added in the section what these advantages stem from. Sam 00:15, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Evolution of scheme
Two sections, Disadvantages of Scheme and Standards, talk about official and community standards, but in a rather unenligtening way. A brief history of scheme should be written, covering the nature of the RnRS process, the status of the IEEE standard, the reasons for doubting there will ever be an R6RS, and why the SRFI process was created and what has been going on with it.
I propose a rewrite of these two sections, with a new section "Evolution of Scheme" as the first numbered section that covers the above. Any objections to me diving in and doing that? ---- Charles Stewart 09:01, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- That's fine with me. Make sure that you do describe the percieved advantages and drawbacks of Scheme, especially compared to other dialects of Lisp (since its advantages and drawbacks as a whole are largely those of Lisp). It may also be interesting to explain how the drawbacks are addressed. ---- Sam 20:42, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Toki Pona?
I am not the one who originally deleted the link to Toki Pona, but after checking it, there is no Scheme code on that page contrary to what the section title claims. In fact ot does not have anything to do with Scheme. Therefore I have removed the link. Is there any good reason to link to that article that I have missed? Sam 04:47, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)