简而言之，宏是代码的转换。它们允许引入许多新的语法结构。例如，考虑c#中的LINQ。在lisp中，有类似的由宏实现的语言扩展(例如，内置循环构造，迭代)。宏显著地减少了代码重复。宏允许嵌入«小语言»(例如，在c#/java中可以使用xml进行配置，在lisp中可以使用宏实现同样的事情)。宏可能隐藏使用库的困难。

例如，在lisp中你可以写

(iter (for (id name) in-clsql-query "select id, name from users" on-database *users-database*)
      (format t "User with ID of ~A has name ~A.~%" id name))

这隐藏了所有数据库的东西(事务，正确的连接关闭，获取数据等)，而在c#中，这需要创建SqlConnections, SqlCommands，将SqlParameters添加到SqlCommands，在SqlDataReaders上循环，正确地关闭它们。

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.

简而言之，宏是代码的转换。它们允许引入许多新的语法结构。例如，考虑c#中的LINQ。在lisp中，有类似的由宏实现的语言扩展(例如，内置循环构造，迭代)。宏显著地减少了代码重复。宏允许嵌入«小语言»(例如，在c#/java中可以使用xml进行配置，在lisp中可以使用宏实现同样的事情)。宏可能隐藏使用库的困难。

例如，在lisp中你可以写

(iter (for (id name) in-clsql-query "select id, name from users" on-database *users-database*)
      (format t "User with ID of ~A has name ~A.~%" id name))

这隐藏了所有数据库的东西(事务，正确的连接关闭，获取数据等)，而在c#中，这需要创建SqlConnections, SqlCommands，将SqlParameters添加到SqlCommands，在SqlDataReaders上循环，正确地关闭它们。

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

While the above all explains what macros are and even have cool examples, I think the key difference between a macro and a normal function is that LISP evaluates all the parameters first before calling the function. With a macro it's the reverse, LISP passes the parameters unevaluated to the macro. For example, if you pass (+ 1 2) to a function, the function will receive the value 3. If you pass this to a macro, it will receive a List( + 1 2). This can be used to do all kinds of incredibly useful stuff.

Adding a new control structure, e.g. loop or the deconstruction of a list Measure the time it takes to execute a function passed in. With a function the parameter would be evaluated before control is passed to the function. With the macro, you can splice your code between the start and stop of your stopwatch. The below has the exact same code in a macro and a function and the output is very different. Note: This is a contrived example and the implementation was chosen so that it is identical to better highlight the difference. (defmacro working-timer (b) (let ( (start (get-universal-time)) (result (eval b))) ;; not splicing here to keep stuff simple ((- (get-universal-time) start)))) (defun my-broken-timer (b) (let ( (start (get-universal-time)) (result (eval b))) ;; doesn't even need eval ((- (get-universal-time) start)))) (working-timer (sleep 10)) => 10 (broken-timer (sleep 10)) => 0

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。