Re: syntax taste: use of unquote in macros

[<tomas@tuxteam.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 983 bytes --]

On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 12:07:07AM +0200, Zelphir Kaltstahl wrote:
> 
> On 3/29/20 5:11 PM, Matt Wette wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I'm not sure if you know about this, but there is a discrepancy in the
> > way some folks define macros to use unquote (aka ,).   For example,

[pmatch vs. match]

> I'm not sure where I first read about pmatch doing the quasiquote
> internally automatically and I of course had already forgotten about it,

[...]

I didn't even know about `pmatch'. Is it supposed to be equivalent
to `match' (except that outer quasiquote, that is)?

With the caveat that I don't have much of a stylistic feeling for
Scheme, I'd clearly prefer `match': the writer has the choice of
quote or quasiquote, as appropriate to the case -- and the reader
sees what's going on (after all, quote and quasiquote are "low
weight" primitives: everyone more or less knows what they do.

But perhaps I misunderstood what you're after?

Cheers
-- tomás

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]