[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?
From: |
Michael Livshin |
Subject: |
Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"? |
Date: |
25 Apr 2001 23:30:28 +0300 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Copyleft) |
"Dale P. Smith" <address@hidden> writes:
> Michael Livshin wrote:
> > I'd rather we figured a way to make the hygienic macro stuff fast
> > enough...
>
> Yes Please! How do other Schemes do it?
other Schemes have compilers -- macros only have compile-time
overhead, after all.
> Will using the new vm on the current implementatin help?
it should. ask Keisuke, he codes. I mostly talk. ;(
--
The PROPER way to handle HTML postings is to cancel the article, then
hire a hitman to kill the poster, his wife and kids, and fuck his dog
and smash his computer into little bits. Anything more is just
extremism. -- Paul Tomblin, in SDM
- Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Rob Browning, 2001/04/24
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Martin Grabmueller, 2001/04/25
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Rob Browning, 2001/04/25
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Rob Browning, 2001/04/25
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Martin Grabmueller, 2001/04/25
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Rob Browning, 2001/04/25
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Michael Livshin, 2001/04/25
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Rob Browning, 2001/04/25
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Dale P. Smith, 2001/04/25
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Rob Browning, 2001/04/25
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Michael Livshin, 2001/04/25
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Nicolas Neuss, 2001/04/25