Message written at 20 Apr 1998 22:37:53 +0100
--- Copy of mail to Christopher.Neese@oberlin.edu ---
In-reply-to: <000401bd6bd0$26bafc40$8be5a284@rn2713.resnet.oberlin.edu>
	(message from Christopher Neese on Sun, 19 Apr 1998 16:17:18 -0400)
References:  <000401bd6bd0$26bafc40$8be5a284@rn2713.resnet.oberlin.edu>

>>>>> "CN" == Christopher Neese  writes:

 CN> This is an interesting solution, and it works really well.
 CN> I'm not sure it is as fool-proof as what I had in mind, but perhaps it is
 CN> more powerful.

......

 CN> The system has these problems:
 CN> 1. Advanced macros can only take 5 arguments.  (can anyone justify this
 CN> number?)  N reduces this number to 4.

The number 5 was chosen by me as a small number which seemed enough.
My current implementation has a fixed table (of which I am not proud)
and I did not want to make it too long.  I will one day (soon?)
convert that to a variable number.  It is only code after all.

I think that teh use of macros is an interesting one.  If one needs to
do something really complex then a true programming language seems
best to me (I use C these days, and LISP before it became so
un-lisp-like).  I wanted a macro sysem which filled the semantic gap
between real languages and the event list and simple text.  The macros
in Extended Csound seemed to me too weak, not havinf any arguments.  I
am sure that the chance of my geting it right is rather low, but we
can iterate or modify.

More on macros soon.

==John