[plt-dev] some Racket proposals & implementation

#:super I dislike a lot. I much prefer

(define-struct struct-name super-name (fields-as-parameters))




On Apr 5, 2010, at 10:31 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Robby Findler
> <robby at eecs.northwestern.edu> wrote:
>> I dislike this change. Brainfuck is very lightweight language too (by
>> the measures of lightweightness I've seen here recently), lets not
>> forget.
>>
>> In more politic words, it seems like making function definitions and
>> structure definitions look so similar to each other is just asking
>> Racket programmers to get confused.
>
> We should also recall that almost all Racket programmers in the near
> future will be people who already know PLT Scheme, and we shouldn't
> throw away their (our) intuitions without strong reasons.  Switching
> to #:super for the much-less-common case is very different from
> changing the syntax in a significant way.
>
> Also, for the foreseeable future, lots of people will program in
> student languages where `define-struct' will have the syntax it has
> now, using a textbook that uses that syntax as well.  I think this
> installed mind-share suggests keeping the basic structure of the
> syntax the same.
> -- 
> sam th
> samth at ccs.neu.edu