<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Greg Hendershott <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:greghendershott@gmail.com" target="_blank">greghendershott@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> Should `def' be added as an alias for `define'?<br> <br> Possible reasons why:<br> 1. Most frequently used.<br> <a href="http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev/archive/2012-May/009429.html" target="_blank">http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev/archive/2012-May/009429.html</a><br> 2. Name shortening seems to be a current theme.<br> 3. The new style guide prefers `define' over `let'.<br> <br> Re 3 I like the less-indented benefit of `define' instead of `let'.<br> OTOH it's more verbose.<br></blockquote><div><br>I agree. I would probably prefer `def' for inner definitions, but stick with `define' for top-level ones. Maybe.<br></div> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> Possible reasons why not:<br> 1. It smells too much like Clojure? (Although I suppose you could<br> argue `define' smells like classic Scheme.)<br></blockquote><div><br>Not imitating good ideas is not really a sign of great intelligence I believe. That does not mean this one is good, just saying.<br><br>Laurent<br> </div></div>