Macro-writing challenge

Write a macro check-arguments-non-nil to be used in function definitions, that would expand to assertion about every argument being non-nil.
The intended usage of this macro:

(defun foo (a b c d)
(check-arguments-non-nil)
foo-body)

This should expand to:

(defun foo (a b c d)
(assert (and (not (null a)) (not (null b)) (not (null c)) (not (null d)))
(a b c d)
"Null argument in FOO")
foo-body)

The macro must work whatever the number and names of the function parameters.

added to varmacro.h as:
#define validargs(args...) !(sum(apply(zeroargs,args)))

>>74
Haskell & Lisp use whitespace as a separator. Why the fuck do you need more punctuation than that? C syntax is just messy and backwards in its goals: Harder to parse, harder for the human to input, harder for the human to read.

When C came out, everybody was railing against the ridiculous semicolons everywhere, because other languages weren't stupid enough to do that. You're just living in an age of Stockholm Syndrome.

>>82
H a s k e l l & L i s p u s e w h i t e s p a c e a s a s e p a r a t o r . W h y t h e f u c k d o y o u n e e d m o r e p u n c t u a t i o n t h a n t h a t ? C s y n t a x i s j u s t m e s s y a n d b a c k w a r d s i n i t s g o a l s : H a r d e r t o p a r s e , h a r d e r f o r t h e h u m a n t o i n p u t , h a r d e r f o r t h e h u m a n t o r e a d.

When(C) came.out();
everybody? was:railing; against== the ridiculous semicolons everywhere;
because other languages weren't stupid enough to do that;
You're= just= living( in(an,nage))->of Stockholm Syndrome;

>>83
For the first case, I think you mean:

Haskell & Lisp use whitespace as a separator. Why the fuck do you need more punctuation than that? C syntax is just messy and backwards in its goals: Harder to parse, harder for the human to input, harder for the human to read.

Because that's already space-delimited symbols. Like our normal Latin-ish languages. Dumbfuck.

>>84
i g u e s s i t s e a s i e r t o r e a d i f y o u h a v e a u t i s m

w h o n e e d s a n y t h i n g b e s i d e s w h i t e s p a c e i t s a p e r f e c t l y c r o m u l e n t p u n c t u a t i o n s t y le th a t r e pl a c e s a ll th e s e i ne f f ic i en c e s o f e n gl i sh l a n g u a g e a n d s im p l if i e s s en t en c e s t r u c t u r e t o f o ll o w t h e h as k el l s t a n d ar d

y, e, s, c, o, m, m, a, s, l, i, k, e, i, n, C, a, r, e, w, a, y, b, e, t, t, e, r, a, n, d, d, o, n, t, a, d, d, a, n, y, t, h, i, n, g, v, i, s, u, a, l, l, y, s, o, t, h, e, y, d, o, n, t, d, i, s, r, u, p, t, r, e, a, d, i, n, g, a, t, a, l, l, a, n, d, e, v, e, r, y, b, o, d, y, a, l, r, e, a, d, y, u, s, e, s, s, p, a, c, e, s, w, i, t, h, t, h, e, m, s, o, i, t, a, l, l, w, o, r, k, s, o, u, t, i, n, t, h, e, e, n, d, r, i, g, h, t;

>>87
C==doesn't(limit){ itself to white-space and comma-only syntax};
It=has !!operators + distinct from ? functions : variables, semicolons;
and {braces.separating_content()}.

Why not just use Tcl? It's also a string-based language, but an actual programming language at that.

>>89
C preprocessor is simpler and is always present with a C compiler - its part of C standard. TCL could be used as preprocessor( www.drdobbs.com/open-source/c-preprocessing-with-tcl/184410635 ) if you add it as dependency, but extending the preprocessor(_TokenOf()) is more beneficial long-term, since even Tcl is in C.
Any extension in the preprocessor benefits the entire software industry since at the base its layer of C code & C macros(and can be used with Assembler).
There tons of C macros in every large C project, like e.g. Linux kernel. Making them less verbose, less cryptic and complex would actually be useful and orderPP would be useless.

>>90
Then as I've said before, just use C to generate C, if the priority is to do metaprogramming only with the standard C toolchain. It's a lot more sane and far less hackish of a setup.

>>91
Macros are more elegant and integrate into the code better.
Its like JavaScript that generates the webpage on which its loaded.

Its like JavaScript that generates the webpage on which its loaded.

Oh boy.

>>93
A better analogy would be PHP embedded in the page, but i don't like PHP.

>>74

diverse

Diversity is shit. Homogenous syntax is lightyears ahead of any Blub syntax, it's easier to edit and read and write. You just need to get a real text editor and not some mouse-dragger.

real text editor

More like text interpreters for programming text. Editors actually edit text, emacsitors and vimitors require you to execute commands and macros to accomplish tasks.

>>95
Not just easier for a human to read & write, but also for the computer. Get that thing to start cranking out code for you so you don't have to. It's a pain in the ass when most other languages require you to build up source code as text blobs.

>>95
That's offensive. The correct term is "point-and-drool". You're giving textual text editors a bad name.

u just need good mice with 8K dpi and you can click faster than these nerds mistyping lunix commands into their text processors

macro expand these dubs

>>100
nice

also, just 10 more for some epic trips.