> The real worry I have is, if we do that, would we create a barrier for > adoption?
I'm sure y'all have had lots of discussions about adoption, so pointers to past threads most appreciated. Starting from first principles, it seems to me somebody who's already using common lisp would be unlikely to switch to sweet exprs. They're likely already fluent with parens-and-prefix, and every lisper I talk to *hates* significant whitespace. I think our target audience is non-lispers who're starting out with lisp. So far it seems sweet-exprs wouldn't really help this hypothetical user because he probably has to deal with an existing codebase that doesn't use sweet-exprs, because its devs are already fluent with parens-and-prefix, etc., etc. Have y'all considered a reverse translator that reads fully-parenthesized lisp or scheme and emits clean and clear parens-and-prefix-free code? Perhaps we should mirror the top 20 lisp projects in our readable style, sucking in new commits as they happen, and see if newcomers to lisp find our mirrors useful. Does this seem like a viable strategy? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Readable-discuss mailing list Readable-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/readable-discuss
