[such_a_casual]

Perl 6 has macros:

Copied from: https://perl6advent.wordpress.com/2012/12/23/day-23-macros/

    macro checkpoint {
      my $i = ++(state $n);
      quasi { say "CHECKPOINT $i"; }
    }

    checkpoint;
    for ^5 { checkpoint; }
    checkpoint;

No "homoiconicity". Just two operators: "macro" which will make a macro instead of a normal function, and "quasi" which says the stuff in here is code that shouldn't be evaluated. In lisp these two operators could be "defmacro" and "quote".

Lisp has a lot of features that other languages haven't implemented. We could spend all day asking why other languages haven't implemented them yet. And it's unfortunate, because just adding the feature for macros would allow you to add a lot of those other features. Indeed, macros are such a big deal that they are probably the sole defining reason that lispers can add features from other languages so easily.

However, we need to stop pretending that code substitution is some magical, genius feature that can only exist in the utopian environment of a common lisp system. It's a simple idea that's been used since before I was born. Macros in lisp are nice because you have so much access to the language, as well as (perhaps more so than any popular language) really smart tools for manipulating the data structure your code is written in. If you have to code code, if you have to write code that manipulates other code, it's nice if that other code is in an easy to understand data structure. And even easier if you already have a bunch of functions, classes, variables, etc given to you by the language for changing that data structure. Which lisp does, and that's what makes lisp lisp.

[bhnmmhmd]

Thank you. I never thought Perl 6 had macros. Plus, now I can see that "homoiconicity" is not required for macro systems.

> However, we need to stop pretending that code substitution is some magical, genius feature that can only exist in the Utopian environment of a common lisp system.

I couldn't agree more.