4 ms·
It's a cool idea, but this basically sneaks new features into the Python language through a backdoor, bypassing the public review/feedback process. I would sugg
by shaddyz 13y ago
It's a cool idea, but this basically sneaks new features into the Python language through a backdoor, bypassing the public review/feedback process. I would suggest the author create a PEP for these features instead.
- SoftwareMaven 13y agoGiven the language's general trend away from functional programming and Guido's flat-out refusal to implement TCO, I think starting with an implementation, showing interest (if it exists), and then trying to standardize via PEPs is probably a reasonable route to go.
- rplacd 13y agoMacros aren't solely used to implement high-level features, mind you - in CL they're introduced without much hassle to work out gruntwork as well precisely because an elided form in s-expressions seems just as natural as the original forms. Although that level of fragmentation you do talk about is plausible - I'd find it simultaneously disheartening and worth a bit of a chuckle. (I'm reminded of all of the concurrency abstractions CL seems "capable of" hosting with minimal friction - but none with definite thrust.)
- scott_s 13y agoThat's rather the point of macros - giving programmers the ability to new features to a language.