Re: Renaming primitives.

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>]

On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 05:47:41 -0400, J-P. Rosen wrote:

> Renames shouldn't be seen as a kind of macro (i.e. textual substitution
> of the LHS by the RHS).

There is the wrong way of implementing macros--by textual substitution--
and there is the right way, as done in homoiconic languages such as Lisp.

For example, the latter can give you lexical binding. That is, the rename 
still refers to the original definition, even in an inner scope where that 
is masked by another entity with the same name. I assume that is how the 
Ada mechanism works.