Re: Sweet-expressions
Once you write enough lisp, eliminating parens becomes more trouble than
it's worth.
Also the guy who did this has the same name as my dad? I'm ashamed.
On Monday, 25 March 2013 06:52:23 UTC-4, poetix wrote:
I really like the look of this:
http://readable.sourceforge.net/
which defines a completely reversible transformation between e.g.
define fibfast(n)
if {n 2}
n
fibup(n 2 1 0)
and
(define (fibfast n)
(if ( n 2)
n
(fibup n 2 1 0)))
and wonder how difficult it would be to support it (or something like it)
in/for Clojure. A coffeescript-like approach might be a good first step.
Any thoughts?
Dominic
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Clojure group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Sweet-expressions
I don't like the idea of infix math as a reader macro. Yeah prefix is weird
to read for complex expressions, but in such rare cases there are ordinary
macros that let you do infix math. Use them.
An interesting thought I had the other day regarding infix math:
It would be possible for Clojure to provide it's own implementations of the
basic number classes (Integer, Long, Double, etc) that implement IFn such
that they take a function and another number and apply themselves and the
other number to the function.
Then we could just write (2 + 5).
I imagine this has all kinds of downsides regarding optimisation and what
to do with numbers that get emitted from java code and so forth.
On Monday, 25 March 2013 10:52:23 UTC, poetix wrote:
I really like the look of this:
http://readable.sourceforge.net/
which defines a completely reversible transformation between e.g.
define fibfast(n)
if {n 2}
n
fibup(n 2 1 0)
and
(define (fibfast n)
(if ( n 2)
n
(fibup n 2 1 0)))
and wonder how difficult it would be to support it (or something like it)
in/for Clojure. A coffeescript-like approach might be a good first step.
Any thoughts?
Dominic
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Clojure group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Sweet-expressions
Right now, Clojure is fighting its way to get to Java-like performance
for numerics, and that involves emitting primitive numbers and
operations whenever possible. I'm afraid that would be utterly
incompatible with turning numbers into functions - that would be at
least two levels of indirection (numbers would have to be objects, and
these objects would have to implement IFn).
Nice idea on a conceptual level, though.
On 26 March 2013 18:18, david sheldrick d.j.sheldr...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't like the idea of infix math as a reader macro. Yeah prefix is weird
to read for complex expressions, but in such rare cases there are ordinary
macros that let you do infix math. Use them.
An interesting thought I had the other day regarding infix math:
It would be possible for Clojure to provide it's own implementations of the
basic number classes (Integer, Long, Double, etc) that implement IFn such
that they take a function and another number and apply themselves and the
other number to the function.
Then we could just write (2 + 5).
I imagine this has all kinds of downsides regarding optimisation and what to
do with numbers that get emitted from java code and so forth.
On Monday, 25 March 2013 10:52:23 UTC, poetix wrote:
I really like the look of this:
http://readable.sourceforge.net/
which defines a completely reversible transformation between e.g.
define fibfast(n)
if {n 2}
n
fibup(n 2 1 0)
and
(define (fibfast n)
(if ( n 2)
n
(fibup n 2 1 0)))
and wonder how difficult it would be to support it (or something like it)
in/for Clojure. A coffeescript-like approach might be a good first step.
Any thoughts?
Dominic
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Clojure group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Clojure group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Sweet-expressions
Oh, it's this thread again. Please read https://groups.google.com/d/topic/clojure/TB4i3ATmrEE/discussion before discussing further. TLDR: If you want to demonstrate the merits of significant white space for clojure, please implement a reader with the alternative rules you envision. Right now, the community seems to sway towards sticking with s-expressions. Personally: The sentiment on readable.sourceforge.net (... a language that makes source code ugly is maddening to an exacting programmer ...) doesn't convince me, since find clojure code neither ugly nor maddening, while I do consider myself exacting. Also the small example, *literally*contrasting (Awkward) S-expression with (Improved) Sweet-expression doesn't lend much credibility. Another problem: Curly braces as syntax are already taken in clojure. I haven't watched the video yet, but will do so later. -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Sweet-expressions
One difficulty in that transformation for clojure might be that {
already has significance to the clojure reader, denoting the beginning
of a map literal.
If { in that notation is exclusively used for infix binary operations,
you could get around it, because in that context the {...} expression
would always have exactly three elements, which isn't legal for a map.
But it would increase potential confusion:
{1 } is a map from the integer 1 to the function
{1 2} is the application of to the arguments 1 and 2
(Odd seeing you here, dominic!)
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 3:52 AM, poetix dominic@gmail.com wrote:
I really like the look of this:
http://readable.sourceforge.net/
which defines a completely reversible transformation between e.g.
define fibfast(n)
if {n 2}
n
fibup(n 2 1 0)
and
(define (fibfast n)
(if ( n 2)
n
(fibup n 2 1 0)))
and wonder how difficult it would be to support it (or something like it)
in/for Clojure. A coffeescript-like approach might be a good first step.
Any thoughts?
Dominic
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Clojure group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
Ben Wolfson
Human kind has used its intelligence to vary the flavour of drinks,
which may be sweet, aromatic, fermented or spirit-based. ... Family
and social life also offer numerous other occasions to consume drinks
for pleasure. [Larousse, Drink entry]
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Clojure group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Sweet-expressions
As stated in the web site, there are sometimes different needs while
creating/editing, and while reading.
I see no need to create a second edition syntax.
It may be interesting (and potentially way easier to prototype / play
with the idea) to only provide alternative views of clojure code.
My 0,02€,
--
Laurent
2013/3/25 poetix dominic@gmail.com:
I really like the look of this:
http://readable.sourceforge.net/
which defines a completely reversible transformation between e.g.
define fibfast(n)
if {n 2}
n
fibup(n 2 1 0)
and
(define (fibfast n)
(if ( n 2)
n
(fibup n 2 1 0)))
and wonder how difficult it would be to support it (or something like it)
in/for Clojure. A coffeescript-like approach might be a good first step.
Any thoughts?
Dominic
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Clojure group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Clojure group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Sweet-expressions
Some idea for alternative clojure syntax:
(first | first coll) ; (first (first coll))
(count | first | second coll) ; (count (first (second coll)))
(nth % 2 | first coll) ; (nth (first coll) 2)
(+ 1)# ; (partial + 1)
(+ 1 (* 2))## ; (fn [nb] (+ 1 (* 2 %))
(count | first | second)## ; (fn [coll] (count (first (second coll
(nth | first | second coll)# ; (fn [nb] (nth (first (second coll)) nb))
2013/3/25 Laurent PETIT laurent.pe...@gmail.com
As stated in the web site, there are sometimes different needs while
creating/editing, and while reading.
I see no need to create a second edition syntax.
It may be interesting (and potentially way easier to prototype / play
with the idea) to only provide alternative views of clojure code.
My 0,02€,
--
Laurent
2013/3/25 poetix dominic@gmail.com:
I really like the look of this:
http://readable.sourceforge.net/
which defines a completely reversible transformation between e.g.
define fibfast(n)
if {n 2}
n
fibup(n 2 1 0)
and
(define (fibfast n)
(if ( n 2)
n
(fibup n 2 1 0)))
and wonder how difficult it would be to support it (or something like it)
in/for Clojure. A coffeescript-like approach might be a good first step.
Any thoughts?
Dominic
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with
your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Clojure group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with
your first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Clojure group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Clojure group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Sweet-expressions
(first | first coll) ; (first (first coll))
(count | first | second coll) ; (count (first (second coll)))
(nth % 2 | first coll) ; (nth (first coll) 2)
How is this better than the threading macro?
(- coll first first)
(- coll second first count)
(- coll first (nth 2))
Timothy Baldridge
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Antoine Noo antoine...@gmail.com wrote:
Some idea for alternative clojure syntax:
(first | first coll) ; (first (first coll))
(count | first | second coll) ; (count (first (second coll)))
(nth % 2 | first coll) ; (nth (first coll) 2)
(+ 1)# ; (partial + 1)
(+ 1 (* 2))## ; (fn [nb] (+ 1 (* 2 %))
(count | first | second)## ; (fn [coll] (count (first (second coll
(nth | first | second coll)# ; (fn [nb] (nth (first (second coll)) nb))
2013/3/25 Laurent PETIT laurent.pe...@gmail.com
As stated in the web site, there are sometimes different needs while
creating/editing, and while reading.
I see no need to create a second edition syntax.
It may be interesting (and potentially way easier to prototype / play
with the idea) to only provide alternative views of clojure code.
My 0,02€,
--
Laurent
2013/3/25 poetix dominic@gmail.com:
I really like the look of this:
http://readable.sourceforge.net/
which defines a completely reversible transformation between e.g.
define fibfast(n)
if {n 2}
n
fibup(n 2 1 0)
and
(define (fibfast n)
(if ( n 2)
n
(fibup n 2 1 0)))
and wonder how difficult it would be to support it (or something like
it)
in/for Clojure. A coffeescript-like approach might be a good first step.
Any thoughts?
Dominic
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with
your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups
Clojure group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an
email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with
your first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Clojure group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with
your first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Clojure group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
“One of the main causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was that–lacking
zero–they had no way to indicate successful termination of their C
programs.”
(Robert Firth)
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Clojure group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Sweet-expressions
As an interesting point of trivia, the idea of abandoning S-expressions for
some other notation actually pre-dates the first implementation of Lisp.
S-expressions were originally intended as a temporary measure, before a
more familiar representation - deemed M-expressions - could be formalized.
But in the words of John McCarthy:
*The project of defining M-expressions precisely and compiling them or at
least translating them into S-expressions was neither finalized nor
explicitly abandoned. It just receded into the indefinite future, and a new
generation of programmers appeared who preferred internal notation to any
FORTRAN-like or ALGOL-like notation that could be devised. The History Of
Lisphttp://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/history/lisp/node3.html#SECTION0003
*
In short, the idea of abandoning S-expressions has fair claim to be one of
the oldest ideas in Lisp. My personal theory about that is that by the time
someone knows enough Lisp to do a decent job of the translation, they no
longer see any problem...
Kris
On Monday, 25 March 2013 10:52:23 UTC, poetix wrote:
I really like the look of this:
http://readable.sourceforge.net/
which defines a completely reversible transformation between e.g.
define fibfast(n)
if {n 2}
n
fibup(n 2 1 0)
and
(define (fibfast n)
(if ( n 2)
n
(fibup n 2 1 0)))
and wonder how difficult it would be to support it (or something like it)
in/for Clojure. A coffeescript-like approach might be a good first step.
Any thoughts?
Dominic
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Clojure group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Sweet-expressions
N
Jason Lewis
Email jasonlewi...@gmail.com
Twitter@canweriotnow http://twitter.com/canweriotnow
Blog http://decomplecting.org
About http://about.me/jason.lewis
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 6:44 PM, Kris Jenkins krisajenk...@gmail.comwrote:
As an interesting point of trivia, the idea of abandoning S-expressions
for some other notation actually pre-dates the first implementation of
Lisp. S-expressions were originally intended as a temporary measure, before
a more familiar representation - deemed M-expressions - could be
formalized. But in the words of John McCarthy:
*The project of defining M-expressions precisely and compiling them or
at least translating them into S-expressions was neither finalized nor
explicitly abandoned. It just receded into the indefinite future, and a new
generation of programmers appeared who preferred internal notation to any
FORTRAN-like or ALGOL-like notation that could be devised. The History
Of
Lisphttp://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/history/lisp/node3.html#SECTION0003
*
In short, the idea of abandoning S-expressions has fair claim to be one of
the oldest ideas in Lisp. My personal theory about that is that by the time
someone knows enough Lisp to do a decent job of the translation, they no
longer see any problem...
Kris
On Monday, 25 March 2013 10:52:23 UTC, poetix wrote:
I really like the look of this:
http://readable.sourceforge.**net/ http://readable.sourceforge.net/
which defines a completely reversible transformation between e.g.
define fibfast(n)
if {n 2}
n
fibup(n 2 1 0)
and
(define (fibfast n)
(if ( n 2)
n
(fibup n 2 1 0)))
and wonder how difficult it would be to support it (or something like it)
in/for Clojure. A coffeescript-like approach might be a good first step.
Any thoughts?
Dominic
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with
your first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Clojure group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Clojure group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Sweet-expressions
I never have understood the obsession with moving the parens in Lisp to the
same place they are in C-like languages. I'm not typing any less, and it
certainly undermines the code = data (i.e. lisp lists / function calls)
homoiconic representation. Is it clearer? Maybe to someone unaccustomed to
Lisp, but it's a very superficial thing- you get used to it (and these days I
screw up interpreting/writing my C-lang code bc/ I'm used to Lisp).
Regarding infix vs. postfix, it doesn't take a Lisper long to appreciate the
advantages of prefix notation, e.g. (+ 1 8 9 3) vs 1 + 8 + 9 + 3.
There is a (arguably, at least) Lisp out there with hardly any parens- Haskell.
:D
On Mar 25, 2013, at 8:02 PM, Jason Lewis jasonlewi...@gmail.com wrote:
N
Jason Lewis
Email jasonlewi...@gmail.com
Twitter@canweriotnow
Blog http://decomplecting.org
About http://about.me/jason.lewis
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 6:44 PM, Kris Jenkins krisajenk...@gmail.com wrote:
As an interesting point of trivia, the idea of abandoning S-expressions for
some other notation actually pre-dates the first implementation of Lisp.
S-expressions were originally intended as a temporary measure, before a more
familiar representation - deemed M-expressions - could be formalized. But in
the words of John McCarthy:
The project of defining M-expressions precisely and compiling them or at
least translating them into S-expressions was neither finalized nor
explicitly abandoned. It just receded into the indefinite future, and a new
generation of programmers appeared who preferred internal notation to any
FORTRAN-like or ALGOL-like notation that could be devised. The History Of
Lisp
In short, the idea of abandoning S-expressions has fair claim to be one of
the oldest ideas in Lisp. My personal theory about that is that by the time
someone knows enough Lisp to do a decent job of the translation, they no
longer see any problem...
Kris
On Monday, 25 March 2013 10:52:23 UTC, poetix wrote:
I really like the look of this:
http://readable.sourceforge.net/
which defines a completely reversible transformation between e.g.
define fibfast(n)
if {n 2}
n
fibup(n 2 1 0)
and
(define (fibfast n)
(if ( n 2)
n
(fibup n 2 1 0)))
and wonder how difficult it would be to support it (or something like it)
in/for Clojure. A coffeescript-like approach might be a good first step.
Any thoughts?
Dominic
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Clojure group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Clojure group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Clojure group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
