Series Expansion said:
The claim made regarding gensyms cannot be correct unless the program
structure in memory (your abstract syntax tree) is not actually a tree
but a directed acyclic graph with undirected cycles. Since the parse
tree of any text source file will be a bona fide tree, it follows that
if the claim regarding gensyms is true, the two representations are
NOT isomorphic; conversely, if as you have claimed the representations
ARE isomorphic the gensym claim is bogus.
Well, for starters, let's clear up some more [insult deleted]
Let's not.
I have no interest in your ad hominem "arguments" so you might as well
quit them.
(1) There is no requirement that the "parse tree" for lisp source has to
be a true tree (as in a directed, acyclic graph).
Ludicrous.
Lisp has read
(and write) syntax for circular structures that allows a source code
to not be a tree at all.
A source code is a linear sequence of characters (ASCII or, less
often, wide characters). There's a difference between source code and
the parse trees used internally by compilers and similar tools.
But that is mostly an aside, since it isn't the fundamental misconception.
This insinuation that I have "misconceptions" is unwelcome and untrue.
It is precisely this ability to execute code that gives Lisp macros the
power that Series Expansion likes to describe as "magical".
It is rude to address someone, in their presence, in the third person.
(And the rest of what you said is pure nonsense.)
The GENSYM that is created for use as the name of a variable DOESN'T
EXIST IN THE SOURCE CODE. It is created at macro-expansion time by
the running of code in the macro-expansion function. So, it is
quite easy to create a new, unique symbol object. And by not
registering the symbol in a package, there is no way to look it up
by name.
Or ever use the same one twice. Kinda limits their usefulness
methinks.
It was in an earlier post of mine. More than one of them in fact; I
kept having to repeat it for the hard of hearing.
Except that [calls me a liar]
No, sir, and indeed I submit that if there is a liar here it is you.
