[racket-dev] P4P: A Syntax Proposal

From: Eli Barzilay (eli at barzilay.org)
Date: Fri Jul 30 05:05:44 EDT 2010

IMO, this thing is missing the point (the usual "parens, ewww!" one),
as long as it ignores infix.  I was contemplating some examples that
would demonstrate this nicely, and then I saw this:

On Jul 28, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote:
> deffun: d/dx(f) =
>   defvar: delta = 0.001
>   fun: (x) in
>     /(-(f(+(x, delta)),
>         f(x)),
>       delta)
> defvar: d/dx-of-square = d/dx(fun: (x) in *(x,x))
> =(round(d/dx-of-square(10)), 20.0)
> =(round(d/dx-of-square(25)), 50.0)

which (again -- IMO) is barely readable for people who know a little
about sexpr syntax, and probably completely unreadable for most

(And, of course, doing infix gets a whole bunch of heavy stuff in --
the redundant parens, stricter syntax for identifiers, etc; I have
high hopes for the honu reader.)

          ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
                    http://barzilay.org/                   Maze is Life!

Posted on the dev mailing list.