I have only a limited knowledge of Lisp (trying to learn a bit in my free time) but as far as I understand Lisp macros allow to introduce new language constructs and syntax by describing them in Lisp ...
I know that they are implemented extremely unsafely in C/C++. Can't they be implemented in a safer way? Are the disadvantages of macros really bad enough to outweigh the massive power they provide?
From different comparisons among C++ templates and C#/Java generics like this one- http://stackoverflow.com/questions/31693/what-are-the-differences-between-generics-in-c-and-java-and-templates-in-c/...
Common Lisp allows you to write macros that do whatever source transformation you want. Scheme gives you a hygienic pattern-matching system that lets you perform transformations as well. How useful ...
When looking Python decorators someone made the statement, that they are as powerful as Lisp macros (particularly Clojure). Looking at the examples given in PEP 318 it looks to me as if they are just ...
Possible Duplicate: Programming languages with a Lisp-like syntax extension mechanism I'm making a programming language, and, having spent some time in Lisp/Scheme, I feel that my language ...