Why Java Won't Have Macros

bugbear writes "Carlos Perez has just posted a page that quotes Sun Java 'theologist' Gilad Bracha about why there is no plan to add macros (in the Lisp sense) to Java."

Comments

Re:OOP

[pauljlucas]

The problem with macros, is they sorta defeat Java's OOP

Macros have nothing to do with programming methodology (OOP, procedural, functional, etc).

Defining a symbol, just to be replaced in thousands of other places where it's written, tied only to the global space.

Yes? So? What things are named or what text is substituted before the compiler looks at it has nothing to do with OOP.

Sounds awfully like a procedure/function to me.

Macros are text substitution or syntax tree manipulation alone. Macros are not called, so why you think they have anything to with procedures or functions?

Perl

[(trb001)]

given this statement

The real point is that LFSPs (Language for Smart People) have a much greater support for abstraction, and in particular for defining your own abstractions, than LFMs (Language for the Masses). ...has anyone declared Perl *the* LFSP? I can't think of a more abstract and unreadable language off the top of my head (Cobol doesn't count just because the younger generation has never used it).

--trb

Java needs Macros, Badly

[__past__]

Lisp-style macros are, in a sense, all about syntactic sugar. They let you write stuff easily and predicably that would be possible, but inconvenient by hand, to the extent that it becomes natural to implement domain-specific languages with them.

Java, and about every non-Lisp language, lacks syntactic extensibility. Yet, Java programmers obviously consider Java syntax to be not usable for a lot of everyday tasks - hence the ever-growing number of special mini-languages around Java, like Ant-XML, XDoclets, JXPath, to a degree even XSLT.

Of course it is possible to implement such DSLs in Java, but you typically end up writing an interpreter, and that usually means that, if you want to use the DSL in your program (say, evaluating expressions built at runtime), you end up manipulating strings and feeding them to a huge, opaque interpreter machinery - which is error prone and the hell to debug. And, by the way, one of the things people often call one of the biggest problems of macros, when they only know C-style ones.

Basically, much of what macros allow you to do is already done in the Java world, just without the language supporting it, and hence in slow, buggy and hard-to-debug, often ill-specified ways.