[racket] syntax, differently

Richard Cleis wrote at 08/01/2010 09:43 PM:
> Perhaps this is related to some of what you are saying: For years I 
> put double spaces after every initial element that had more purpose 
> than a basic function (define, cond, let, etc.) I wish I had time to 
> make a formatter do that, because I still like it.  

For perhaps similar reasons, Quack puts the names of special syntax in 
boldface[*], which is a heads-up that, well, it's special syntax.

http://i.imgur.com/wfNO2.png

Note that, contrary to some popular conventions around that time, names 
of standard procedures are *not* boldfaced.

I think someone in this conversation mentioned having trouble originally 
with some of the standard special syntax forms.  For whatever reason, I 
don't recall having trouble with these forms when I was first learning 
Lisp dialects.  Perhaps the boldface helped.

Didn't Check Syntax in DrScheme put special syntax names in boldface by 
default in versions 2xx or 1xx (and then stopped in a later version, 
when it got more info and started making all identifiers various shades 
of blue)?  Quack might've been inspired by that at the same time that it 
stole the 2xx color scheme.

[*] Quack does this in a kludgey and limited way.  DrRacket in theory 
can do it properly.

-- 
http://www.neilvandyke.org/