I agree. Avoid braces except where it adds clarity, (multiple instructions on a single line, etc. Both Haskell and Ruby follow this convention and it's pleasant, even though ruby is still do/end delineated while Haskell is indented)
Also, WRT the let scoping issue. Indentation is enforced in Haskell when you enter a scope like a let/in block. I think that this could help avoid misrepresenting the intent of code. On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 12:44 PM, Zorg 421 <[email protected]> wrote: > I would be disapointed if BitC would use curly braces in many places > like C does, but not in very selected area like the imperative > sequence of ocaml: > > do {expr1; epr2; expr3; expr3} > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 6:36 PM, Jonathan S. Shapiro <[email protected]> > wrote: > > In general, I feel that syntactic keywords should mostly NOT be > > punctuation. Using identifiers mostly improves readability, and it is > > easier for users of international keyboards. > > > > I do not intend to rule out use of punctuation entirely. Some uses are > > either deeply embedded in PL history ("." to select a name within a > > containing environment) or consistent with normal written usage (e.g. > > semicolon for sequencing). > > > > Anybody want to argue for curly braces? > > _______________________________________________ > > bitc-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > bitc-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev > -- We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them. - A. Einstein
_______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
