Okay, I just looked that up and I'm still not sure what you mean. :)
Robby
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Shriram Krishnamurthi <s...@cs.brown.edu>
wrote:
> 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
