[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?
From: |
Rob Browning |
Subject: |
Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"? |
Date: |
25 Apr 2001 11:25:51 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7 |
Michael Livshin <address@hidden> writes:
> I'd rather we figured a way to make the hygienic macro stuff fast
> enough...
So it's slow? I now have let*-values written with both define-macro
and syntax-rules. While let-values will have to be switched to
syntax-rules to be safe, I could leave let*-values as a define-macro
if it would be a big advantage...
--
Rob Browning <address@hidden> PGP=E80E0D04F521A094 532B97F5D64E3930
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, (continued)
- 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 <=
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Michael Livshin, 2001/04/25
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Nicolas Neuss, 2001/04/25
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Martin Grabmueller, 2001/04/25
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Nicolas Neuss, 2001/04/26
Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Marius Vollmer, 2001/04/25