I disagree. I think parens are synecdoche.
Shriram
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 1:28 PM, Robby Findler
<ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu> wrote:
> 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.
>
> Robby
>
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 12:19 PM, Joe Marshall <jmarsh...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Everett <we...@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
>>
> _________________________________________________
> For list-related administrative tasks:
> http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
_________________________________________________
For list-related administrative tasks:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
