DIP78 - macros without syntax extensions

Idan Arye via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Wed May 27 12:41:00 PDT 2015

On Wednesday, 27 May 2015 at 19:15:34 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2015-05-27 14:17, Kagamin wrote:
>> Well, that's the point: the function is a normal function, 
>> only some of
>> its parameters require specially prepared arguments, this 
>> can't be
>> missed as soon as arguments are passed to the respective 
>> parameters.
> I prefer to be more explicit in this case, especially since the 
> keyword is already available.

I think it's more important to be explicit in the macro 
invocation than in the macro declaration. You can tell from the 
macro declaration that it's a macro you are looking at, even 
without the `macro` keyword, but the proposed syntaxes offer no 
no way to tell between a regular function call and a macro 
invocation by looking at the callsite alone.

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list