[racket-dev] P4P: A Syntax Proposal

From: Robby Findler (robby at eecs.northwestern.edu)
Date: Thu Jul 29 13:28:45 EDT 2010

FWIW, I think you're probably right that "parens" are actually code
for "I don't want to think so hard" so while an alternative syntax may
take away one excuse, language design and libraries and good docs and
tutorials all the other things are probably going to be required as
well to really make the language a success.


On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 12:19 PM, Joe Marshall <jmarshall at alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Everett <webj2 at unoc.net> wrote:
>> I've always thought the problem was the parens.
> I don't believe this.  If the parens were the problem, then why didn't
> M-expressions gain popularity?  Why didn't CGOL?  Why didn't Dylan?
> Why hasn't *any* alternative syntax helped? (Honu, anyone?)
> And why aren't parens a problem in C:
>          if (unlikely(!access_ok(VERIFY_READ, iocbpp, (nr*sizeof(*iocbpp)))))
>                return -EFAULT;
> or Java?
>        private static void defCategory(String name,
>                                        final int typeMask) {
>            map.put(name, new CharPropertyFactory() {
>                    CharProperty make() { return new Category(typeMask);}});
>        }
> --
> ~jrm
> _________________________________________________
>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>  http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev

Posted on the dev mailing list.