一行程序回答:

简单的语法=>宏over表达式=>简洁=>抽象=>强大

Lisp宏只是以编程方式编写代码。也就是说，在展开宏之后，您得到的只不过是没有宏的Lisp代码。所以，原则上来说，他们没有什么新成就。

然而，它们与其他编程语言中的宏不同，它们在表达式级别上编写代码，而其他宏在字符串级别上编写代码。这在lisp中是独一无二的，这要感谢他们的括号;或者更准确地说，它们的最小语法多亏了括号。

正如本文中的许多示例所示，以及Paul Graham的On Lisp, Lisp宏可以成为使代码更加简洁的工具。当简洁性达到一定程度时，它为代码提供了新的抽象级别，使其更加简洁。回到第一点，原则上他们没有提供任何新的东西，但这就像说既然纸和铅笔(几乎)组成了图灵机，我们就不需要真正的计算机。

如果你懂点数学，想想为什么函子和自然变换是有用的想法。原则上，它们没有提供任何新东西。然而，通过将它们扩展到较低层次的数学中，你会发现几个简单想法的组合(就范畴理论而言)可能需要10页才能写下来。你喜欢哪一种?

一行程序回答:

简单的语法=>宏over表达式=>简洁=>抽象=>强大

Lisp宏只是以编程方式编写代码。也就是说，在展开宏之后，您得到的只不过是没有宏的Lisp代码。所以，原则上来说，他们没有什么新成就。

然而，它们与其他编程语言中的宏不同，它们在表达式级别上编写代码，而其他宏在字符串级别上编写代码。这在lisp中是独一无二的，这要感谢他们的括号;或者更准确地说，它们的最小语法多亏了括号。

正如本文中的许多示例所示，以及Paul Graham的On Lisp, Lisp宏可以成为使代码更加简洁的工具。当简洁性达到一定程度时，它为代码提供了新的抽象级别，使其更加简洁。回到第一点，原则上他们没有提供任何新的东西，但这就像说既然纸和铅笔(几乎)组成了图灵机，我们就不需要真正的计算机。

如果你懂点数学，想想为什么函子和自然变换是有用的想法。原则上，它们没有提供任何新东西。然而，通过将它们扩展到较低层次的数学中，你会发现几个简单想法的组合(就范畴理论而言)可能需要10页才能写下来。你喜欢哪一种?

In python you have decorators, you basically have a function that takes another function as input. You can do what ever you want: call the function, do something else, wrap the function call in a resource acquire release, etc. but you don't get to peek inside that function. Say we wanted to make it more powerful, say your decorator received the code of the function as a list then you could not only execute the function as is but you can now execute parts of it, reorder lines of the function etc.

您将在这里找到关于lisp宏的全面辩论。

这篇文章的一个有趣的子集:

In most programming languages, syntax is complex. Macros have to take apart program syntax, analyze it, and reassemble it. They do not have access to the program's parser, so they have to depend on heuristics and best-guesses. Sometimes their cut-rate analysis is wrong, and then they break. But Lisp is different. Lisp macros do have access to the parser, and it is a really simple parser. A Lisp macro is not handed a string, but a preparsed piece of source code in the form of a list, because the source of a Lisp program is not a string; it is a list. And Lisp programs are really good at taking apart lists and putting them back together. They do this reliably, every day. Here is an extended example. Lisp has a macro, called "setf", that performs assignment. The simplest form of setf is (setf x whatever) which sets the value of the symbol "x" to the value of the expression "whatever". Lisp also has lists; you can use the "car" and "cdr" functions to get the first element of a list or the rest of the list, respectively. Now what if you want to replace the first element of a list with a new value? There is a standard function for doing that, and incredibly, its name is even worse than "car". It is "rplaca". But you do not have to remember "rplaca", because you can write (setf (car somelist) whatever) to set the car of somelist. What is really happening here is that "setf" is a macro. At compile time, it examines its arguments, and it sees that the first one has the form (car SOMETHING). It says to itself "Oh, the programmer is trying to set the car of somthing. The function to use for that is 'rplaca'." And it quietly rewrites the code in place to: (rplaca somelist whatever)

由于现有的答案给出了很好的具体例子来解释宏实现了什么以及如何实现的，也许它会帮助收集一些关于为什么宏功能相对于其他语言是一个重要的收获的想法;首先是这些答案，然后是其他地方的一个很棒的答案:

．.． 在C语言中，你必须编写一个自定义的预处理器(这可能是一个足够复杂的C程序)……

—瓦廷

与任何精通c++的人交谈，问他们花了多长时间来学习模板元编程(仍然不是那么强大)所需要的所有模板。

马特·柯蒂斯

．.． 在Java中，你必须破解字节码编织的方法，尽管像AspectJ这样的框架允许你使用不同的方法来做到这一点，但它基本上是一种破解。

——米格尔·平

DOLIST is similar to Perl's foreach or Python's for. Java added a similar kind of loop construct with the "enhanced" for loop in Java 1.5, as part of JSR-201. Notice what a difference macros make. A Lisp programmer who notices a common pattern in their code can write a macro to give themselves a source-level abstraction of that pattern. A Java programmer who notices the same pattern has to convince Sun that this particular abstraction is worth adding to the language. Then Sun has to publish a JSR and convene an industry-wide "expert group" to hash everything out. That process--according to Sun--takes an average of 18 months. After that, the compiler writers all have to go upgrade their compilers to support the new feature. And even once the Java programmer's favorite compiler supports the new version of Java, they probably ''still'' can't use the new feature until they're allowed to break source compatibility with older versions of Java. So an annoyance that Common Lisp programmers can resolve for themselves within five minutes plagues Java programmers for years.

——peter Seibel，在《Practical Common Lisp》中

我不确定我能给每个人的(优秀的)帖子添加一些见解，但是……

Lisp宏工作得很好，因为Lisp语法的本质。

Lisp是一种非常规则的语言(把所有东西都想象成一个列表);宏使您能够将数据和代码视为相同的(不需要字符串解析或其他技巧来修改lisp表达式)。将这两个特性结合起来，就有了一种非常简洁的方式来修改代码。

编辑:我想说的是Lisp是同构的，这意味着Lisp程序的数据结构是用Lisp本身编写的。

因此，您最终可以在语言之上创建自己的代码生成器，使用语言本身的所有功能(例如。在Java中，你必须破解字节码编织的方法，尽管一些框架(如AspectJ)允许你使用不同的方法来做到这一点，但它基本上是一种破解)。

在实践中，使用宏可以在lisp的基础上构建自己的迷你语言，而不需要学习其他语言或工具，并使用语言本身的全部功能。