3 ms·

I'd use "set" instead of "bind" and be consistent that assignment leverages the vanilla equality operator (since we're already talking about that for "let") but

by Pxtl 9y ago

I'd use "set" instead of "bind" and be consistent that assignment leverages the vanilla equality operator (since we're already talking about that for "let") but yeah, it sounds like you've been thinking about the same stuff I have. It sounds like you've been pondering the same problems I have. In my case it's because I've been working on a rules-engine for scientists and currently we're using SQL for the rule language and some of the syntactic warts of SQL are tripping us up. I keep meaning to learn enough Racket Scheme to experiment with implementing such a language in macros.

abecedarius 9y ago
FWIW, Common Lisp's macro system is relatively simple. I've been meaning to check out http://beautifulracket.com/ http://beautifulracket.com/ sometime to learn about the Racket way. Maybe Datalog could make a cleaner base for your project? Just a random thought; bound to be lots more considerations. Yeah, I have a project right now too where these questions come up -- https://github.com/darius/squeam https://github.com/darius/squeam -- though it's not really ready for anyone.