Responding to Everett's suggestion:
>> I don't understand why not write a lexer, since replacing "do: ()" with
>> "{}" is the most natural and readable thing to do.
>
> I really don't want to touch the lexer level.
>
> Until this morning, I didn't know how to check for { ... }, which is
> why I had the do: keyword. It appears that I can get rid of it. I
> have to decide now whether I want to. I'll think about that.
I can't get rid of it. Currently,
do: { f(x) }
is unambiguously a single-statement/expression begin, without having
to look at subsequent context. If I make it optional, then the same
phrase could be either the interpretation above, or a begin with a
single expression, but where that expression is an application, whose
function position is a complex expression (namely, f(x)).
In general, I am very wary of anything optional.
Shriram
_________________________________________________
For list-related administrative tasks:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
