On 9/26/05, Jim Freeze <jim / freeze.org> wrote:
> On 9/26/05, James Britt <james_b / neurogami.com> wrote:
> > Joe Van Dyk wrote:
> >
> > Anyway, there have been sporadic discussions both here and on ruby-core
> > about adding true Lisp-style macros to Ruby.  My understanding is that
> > while Ruby can do assorted flips and twists, it cannot do quite the same
> > sort of things as found in Lisp (and I hope a true Lisper here can
> > elaborate on this); I also believe that Matz is less than enamored with
> > idea of adding this to Ruby (and I hope a true Matz can elaborate on
> > this, too).
>
> Matz has said (at the Lightweight Language Conf) that Ruby will never
> have macros because they are too easily abused, by the average person,
> to mutate the language.

Was he joking?

> Yes, Ruby has continuations and one can abuse them, but you have to
> be really smart. The average person won't even use them, let alone
> abuse them. :)