Interpolated strings

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 19 April 2017 at 03:49:09 UTC, bpr wrote:
> I don't think I've ever heard from Common Lisp, Scheme or 
> Clojure programmers that they'd like to remove macros from 
> their respective languages for the reasons you mention. I don't 
> see the disasters there. The Julia folks looked at the Lisp 
> experience and decided to include macros.

Lisp AST is minimal.

> Both Rust and Nim support macros. Scala too. Not long enough 
> for the disaster yet?

How many Rust programmers write their own macros? My impression 
is that Rust macros is a temporary fix because they don't have 
another meta programming scheme in place. I also believe that 
Rust macros can break between releases.

> last resort. But they're very powerful, and sometimes I'm not 
> smart enough to figure out how to do what I want cleanly with 
> less powerful features.

Like what?

Certainly, term-rewrite-languages are powerful, e.g. the language 
Pure:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_(programming_language)

But I don't quite see it as an important feature for an 
imperative language with an AST as complex as D and with rather 
non-uniform semantics.

If you want AST-macros in D you should also argue for redefining 
the core language, and turn everything that is unnecessary and 
that can be done as lowering into macros (e.g. "for each").