But if you seriously drop the parns, it'd look like this!!
o^.^oo^.^o
So you can't see where they're facing anymore!
On 7/19/12, Kartik Agaram a...@akkartik.com wrote:
This was intended to be a joke v(^^)v o(^.^o)(o^.^)o
Yeah I saw that, but I wanted to see how ha-ha-only-serious it was :)
There have been dozens of Lisp-based programming languages that started with
that premise, starting with McCarthy's M-expressions.
But I think my proposal hasn't been tried before: a single consistent
set of primitives that map 1-1 to various lisp dialects.
You wouldn't be able to translate a
On 7/19/12, Kartik Agaram a...@akkartik.com wrote:
There have been dozens of Lisp-based programming languages that started
with that premise, starting with McCarthy's M-expressions.
But I think my proposal hasn't been tried before: a single consistent
set of primitives that map 1-1 to various
How do we express the usage of [such macros] using the Unified Syntax for
Indented Lisp?
I'm hoping that if the unified syntax takes hold then people will tend
to just define their own macros differently.
There's the obvious workarounds, of course, like defining my-and-let*
that massages
It looks at the port... and sees a space!! Oh noes!! Someone has
just indented the first line! Okay, let's count the first line's
indent... two spaces. Let's pretend that this is the 'left edge'..
let's go to the next line... oh noes! It's got one space for indent -
it's managed to go
First read(): Reads foo, bar, and it consumes the indentation of eggs so
that it can determine that another is at the same level. It returns (foo
bar).
Ah yes, this bug actually took me *forever* to understand in wart :)
This also helps me understand the other discussions here about
Alan, would you really prefer SPLIT/SPLICE to just combining clauses with
the previous line when writing (
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.readable-lisp/367)?
. list-of x
. var in expr
. clauses \ ...
vs
list-of (var in expr) clauses ...
David Wheeler
Well, all the examples I make are as how I would write them, not as how I would
On 7/19/12, Kartik Agaram a...@akkartik.com wrote:
Alan, would you really prefer SPLIT/SPLICE to just combining clauses with
the previous line when writing (
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.readable-lisp/367)?
Well, all the examples I make are as how I would write them
Ah, thanks for the clarification!
--
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has
On 7/19/12, Kartik Agaram a...@akkartik.com wrote:
Well, all the examples I make are as how I would write them
Ah, thanks for the clarification!
Anyway, I will also do some exploratory syntaxing, but if I find some
problem or difficulty with it, I'll just silently drop it.
You'll more
Kartik Agaram:
I fear that 'pressing' might be distorting our sense of the relative
frequency of different constructs. SPLIT/SPLICE is for arc's if; there it
actually looks good as a separator. I would be less concerned about SPLIT if
it's going to be fairly uncommon in other situations.
On 7/19/12, David A. Wheeler dwhee...@dwheeler.com wrote:
I'm rather curious what Alan Manuel Gloria thinks about my \\ symbol idea,
which I believe eliminates the problems from slashification.
I still prefer \, but I won't object to \\.
I also won't object to ~ or !.
So if I were to rank
SPLIT *between* symbols is one of those things that is not needed in many
cases, but in those few cases where you want it, you REALLY want it.
Absolutely. But if it's an uncommon use case then I'm less concerned
about what y'all choose.
Unfortunately, Alan's response suggests I'd end up
13 matches
Mail list logo
