Reader macros are syntactic sugar on top of the syntax. They identify immediately what they stand for unambigously.
I doubt that it would be a good idea to introduce this kind of logic in the reader. That's an open door to chaos. The same token could be used for different constructs. As Meikel said, you can achieve a more readable result using vector and alikes to avoid confusion. In the same lineage, Clojure has no user alterable reader tables to avoid messing with input interpretation. That's been a clear statement since the beginning and I would be surprised that this changes. Don't hold your breath waiting for this to happen :) Luc > I doubt that this change would break anything, as the case that has changed > has been pretty useless so far. > > On 4 Jun 2012, at 13:32, Moritz Ulrich wrote: > > > I don't think redefining the behavior of fundamental syntax is a good > > idea. Might break many things. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Clojure" group. > To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com > Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your > first post. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en > -- Softaddicts<lprefonta...@softaddicts.ca> sent by ibisMail from my ipad! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
