Re: [PATCH] Possibility of using alternative separators in macros

[Christian Moe]

Maxim Nikulin writes:

> On 03/05/2021 04:08, Christian Moe wrote:
[snip]
>> Something that would help, without adding new syntax, is
>> making macro expansion smart enough to *ignore* separators when the
>> macro definition contains only *one* argument anyway, as in the cases
>> above.
>
> I think, this is an idea of the best approach. Unsure concerning
> precise form. Maybe e.g. "$_" could expand into all arguments greater
> than maximum referenced number. No promise of forward compatibility of
> the following hack since it relies on undocumented implementation
> details.
>
> #+MACRO: allargshack (eval (format "- /%s/ :: %s" $1 (mapconcat
> #'identity _ ",")))
>
> {{{allargshack(one, two, three)}}}
>
> I do not know if Eric can swap order of arguments of his credits
> macro. Extracting namely last argument requires a bit more lisp code.


Yes, I didn't think that far. This would provide a comprehensive
backwards-compatible solution to the comma-escaping problem, though
perhaps not the most newbie-friendly one. It would also make macros more
flexible and powerful in the bargain (I'm sure people will think of
other uses for this than commas).

Yours,
Christian