Stefan, I've wondered if command literals couldn't be created with just a new non-standard string literal, something like c"command arg1 arg2". The only problem I see is that then every double quote mark in the command has to escaped (which will confuse the code though). Even if I use the command syntax a lot, sometimes I think that backticks could be used in something else...
On Wednesday, February 26, 2014 3:44:54 PM UTC, Stefan Karpinski wrote: > > Yes, the backtick is used for command > syntax<http://docs.julialang.org/en/latest/manual/running-external-programs/>. > > Sometimes I think it would be really nice to have it for expression quoting > since markdown has acclimatized us to using backticks for quoting code, but > command syntax is way too handy to steal this from – and its interior > interpolation rules are far trickier than normal quotations so you can't > just use a normal string construct. > > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 8:57 AM, David Moon <dave...@alum.mit.edu<javascript:> > > wrote: > >> I am not suggesting any change to :(x+y) so it would continue to be the >> same as quote x+y end. I think that would return Expr(internal_symbol("+", >> context), internal_symbol("x", context), internal_symbol("y", context)) to >> use a sketchy syntax that might not actually be valid Julia. >> >> I like using the ` character for quasiquote as in Lisp but isn't Julia >> already using ` for something more widely used? >> >> >> On Tuesday, February 25, 2014 11:00:32 PM UTC-5, Fil Mackay wrote: >>> >>> The semantics of :symbol would not change from the *status quo* under >>>> my proposal. >>>> >>>> Perhaps :(x) should be the same as :x rather than the same as quote x >>>> end. Thus if the result of the unary : operator is just a symbol, it is >>>> always an external symbol, but the *quote* special form is able to >>>> produce just an internal symbol. >>>> >>> >>> What would :(x+y) produce - invalid or quote x + y end? This "inline >>> quote" format seems to be used quite a lot and handy. I have wondered about >>> using a different character for symbols and quotes to avoid this ambiguity. >>> >>> >
