ScholarLens Back to search
1986•ACM SIGART BulletinRequires access

Sometimes an FEXPR is better than a macro

Z Lichtman

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Common Lisp, which is becoming THE Lisp standard, does not support call by text (FEXPR mechanism in Mac/Franz Lisp). This effect can be obtained using macros. Based on the experience of converting an OPS5 implementation from Franz Lisp to Common Lisp, it is argued that sometimes call by text is needed for efficiency, despite its negative aspects.In the case of languages embedded in a Lisp system, using the macro alternative for call by text can cause marco expansion at execution time. This leads to a some-what less efficient implementation of the embedded language.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Common Lisp, which is becoming THE Lisp standard, does not support call by text (FEXPR mechanism in Mac/Franz Lisp). This effect can be obtained using macros. Based on the experience of converting an OPS5 implementation from Franz Lisp to Common Lisp, it is argued that sometimes call by text is needed for efficiency, despite its negative aspects.In the case of languages embedded in a Lisp system, using the macro alternative for call by text can cause marco expansion at execution time. This leads to a some-what less efficient implementation of the embedded language.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Common Lisp, which is becoming THE Lisp standard, does not support call by text (FEXPR mechanism in Mac/Franz Lisp). This effect can be obtained using macros. Based on the experience of converting an OPS5 implementation from Franz Lisp to Common Lisp, it is argued that sometimes call by text is needed for efficiency, despite its negative aspects.In the case of languages embedded in a Lisp system, using the macro alternative for call by text can cause marco expansion at execution time. This leads to a some-what less efficient implementation of the embedded language.

Key concepts: Lisp, Macro, Computer science, Programming language, Common Lisp, Exception handling, Preprocessor, Scheme (mathematics)

Related papers

Related paper 1Related paper 2
Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Sometimes an FEXPR is better than a macro — Research Paper | ScholarLens