我从通用的lisp烹饪书中得到了这个，我认为它解释了为什么lisp宏是有用的。

宏是一段普通的Lisp代码，它对另一段假定的Lisp代码进行操作，将其翻译成(更接近于)可执行的Lisp。这听起来可能有点复杂，所以让我们举一个简单的例子。假设您想要一个版本的setq，将两个变量设置为相同的值。所以如果你写

(setq2 x y (+ z 3))

当z=8时，x和y都被设为11。(我想不出这有什么用，但这只是一个例子。)

It should be obvious that we can't define setq2 as a function. If x=50 and y=-5, this function would receive the values 50, -5, and 11; it would have no knowledge of what variables were supposed to be set. What we really want to say is, When you (the Lisp system) see (setq2 v1 v2 e), treat it as equivalent to (progn (setq v1 e) (setq v2 e)). Actually, this isn't quite right, but it will do for now. A macro allows us to do precisely this, by specifying a program for transforming the input pattern (setq2 v1 v2 e)" into the output pattern (progn ...)."

如果你觉得这很好，你可以继续读下去: http://cl-cookbook.sourceforge.net/macros.html

我认为我从来没有见过比这个家伙解释得更好的Lisp宏:http://www.defmacro.org/ramblings/lisp.html

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

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。

Lisp宏代表了几乎在任何大型编程项目中都会出现的一种模式。最终，在一个大的程序中，你会有一段代码，你会意识到，如果你写一个程序，把源代码输出为文本，然后你就可以粘贴进去，这会更简单，更不容易出错。

在Python中，对象有两个方法__repr__和__str__。__str__只是人类可读的表示。__repr__返回一个有效的Python代码表示，也就是说，可以作为有效的Python输入解释器。通过这种方式，您可以创建一些小的Python代码片段，生成可以粘贴到实际源代码中的有效代码。

在Lisp中，整个过程由宏系统形式化。当然，它允许您为语法创建扩展并执行各种奇特的事情，但它的实际用处可以从上面总结出来。当然，Lisp宏系统允许您使用整个语言的全部功能来操作这些“片段”是有帮助的。

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)