What don't you like about Racket macros? AFAIK Racket has the most advanced macro hygiene system out of any of the other languages you mentioned - it guarantees that all macros are hygienic by default, as opposed to other Lisps which require you to manually call (gensym) or use special syntax in your macro to guarantee that macro symbols don't shadow existing bindings.
iddiid|5 years ago
But the moment I stepped past routine pattern-matching, I kind of fell off a cliff into a terminology soup. I marinaded myself in material, hoping it would eventually sink in after enough re-readings. I even found myself using trial and error, rather than having a clear mental model what was going on. Gah.
(1) https://www.greghendershott.com/fear-of-macros/all.html
My personal opinion: I think racket is more an ivory tower for researcher, many for northwest university. “PLT” refers to the group that is the core of the Racket development team. PLT consists of numerous people distributed across several different universities in the USA.
As I am getting older I should prefer some middle ground between racket and go. Hygienic macros are difficult to understand in this context, that is I don't want to buy the power of hygienic macros, it is over sold.
Anyway, I admire Mattew Flatt efforts in compilation tecniques and the author of Beautiful Racket.
klibertp|5 years ago
> that precludes hygienic macros.
The fact that you are so fixated on hygiene as problematic, but can't really explain why you think it's like this, is a huge red herring.
baldfat|5 years ago