Instead of "static type advocate", maybe we should call them "metaprogramming deniers". Then there are the metaprogramming deniers who don't even advocate static types. Morons.
-
Show this thread
-
I’ve been thinking about this. Except for code instrumentation and trivial boilerplate generation I’ve never missed macros. Can you come up with a problem that macros solve that isn’t solved by (maybe free monadic, but also plain old) ADT DSLs + interpreters?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @pkamenarsky @msimoni
Interpreters? Macros are compilers. Incrementally defined. Extensible. With no syntactic overhead. But yeah, if you can use interpreters, one will suffice to solve all issues: a Lisp interpreter. (If you can't, or simply don't, your effective language isn't Turing-complete.)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Yeah, I know what macros are :) I was asking for a concrete example when a ADT DSL wouldn’t suffice, because frankly I can’t come up with one (except for the aforementioned two cases).
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @pkamenarsky @msimoni
For a cool use of macros, see my ILC 2012 paper where I automatically transform data structure libraries between pure and stateful styles and object oriented and type class styles.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
LIL: CLOS reaches higher-order, sheds identity, and has a transformative experiencehttps://github.com/fare/lil-ilc2012 …
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
Read my blog!