... and make Julia to " what regex is to /\ /\/\/.*|\/\*[\w]*\*\/
Ack On Wednesday, February 26, 2014 12:27:55 PM UTC-5, Ivar Nesje wrote: > > We could make people use triple double quotes when their command contains > single `"` cmd"""rm -rf ". /" """, but that would probably often lead to > #5800 <https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/5800>, when the command > ends in a `"`. > > Ivar > > kl. 17:13:58 UTC+1 onsdag 26. februar 2014 skrev Stefan Karpinski følgende: >> >> Yeah, that double quote issue is the main problem. It's pretty common to >> want to use double quotes in commands, so using double quotes for command >> syntax would make things much nastier – and very importantly, no longer >> cut-and-paste from the command line. Code quotation and metaprogramming is >> a more niche activity than running external commands, so in this showdown, >> running external commands still takes precedence. >> >> >> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:06 AM, Cristóvão Duarte Sousa < >> cri...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> 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>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. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>
