Am Freitag, 21. November 2014, 19:31:54 schrieb David A. Wheeler:
> David A. Wheeler:
> > wisp:
> > define : hello
> > display "Hello World!"
> > newline
> > define : hello2 who
> > format #t "Hello ~A!\n" who
>
> If you're using wisp you probably do *not* want to use
> a
Am Freitag, 21. November 2014, 18:48:16 schrieb David A. Wheeler:
> It is obviously possible to change the semantics of leading period.
> I am hesitant to add yet another operator; you may disagree but I
> really tried to make it a short list.
I know you did. Every single additional operator came
David A. Wheeler:
> > If wisp interpreted neoteric-expressions by default,
> > then many more expressions work in both systems...
On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 22:38:13 +0100, Arne Babenhauserheide
wrote:
> That’s true, but then lines with a single element would be treated
> differently than lines with mu
It is obviously possible to change the semantics of leading period. I am
hesitant to add yet another operator; you may disagree but I really tried to
make it a short list. I also really wanted to fix the notation, but leading
period is basically never used so that is probably not really a prob
Am Mittwoch, 19. November 2014, 18:34:25 schrieb David A. Wheeler:
> It's possible to write code that is interpreted *identically*
> on both wisp and sweet when indentation is enabled.
That’s cool!
> In sweet, a "." at the
> beginning of a line post-indent is basically ignored.
Would it be possi
At Wed, 19 Nov 2014 15:46:54 -0500 (EST),
dwheeler wrote:
>
> On Wed, 19 Nov 2014 20:48:28 +0100, Arne Babenhauserheide
> wrote:
> > It’s crazy to think that nowadays it’s actually possible to do
> >
> > guile -L . --language=wisp tests/factorial.w
> >
> > and have guile execute the file
