News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on How Lisp macros differ from static code-generation and metaprogramming. Parent comment

Re:How Lisp macros differ from static code-generation and me... by prodigal_erik on Wednesday January 26, 2011 @09:15PM (#2146284)
It took five years for LINQ to be added to C# because it was too painful for anyone other than Microsoft to add any syntax to the language. Macros would have fixed that.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How Lisp macros differ from static code-generation and me... by Dn_Ab on Wednesday January 26, 2011 @09:34PM (#2146332)
it's interesting that you say this because Nemerle, another language on the .NET platform implemented LINQ into the language using Macros.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How Lisp macros differ from static code-generation and me... by kenjackson on Wednesday January 26, 2011 @11:19PM (#2146561)
Lambdas, type inference, extension methods, etc... all good stuff. LINQ itself they could have skipped. And if macros help accelerate more stuff like the syntax in LINQ -- well I think that proves my point.
[ Parent | on HN ]