On Jul 2, 2014, at 2:26 PM, Neil Van Dyke wrote: > Loop syntax and sugar is fine. And having "#:continue" and "#:break" > keywords at the top of the form is sufficient warning of surprises ahead, > IMHO. > > I do have a minor ongoing concern that people coming from other languages > lately latch onto the "for" family of forms from the start, don't get enough > exposure to named-"let", and/or mutually/self-recursive procedures, and then > end up shoehorning problems into the "for" forms (with flag variables and > redundant checks and such). "break" and "continue" can be good shoehorns. > > I still half-seriously like the idea of having unlockable language feature > achievements, like unlockable equipment in video games. I might play with > that idea soon.
Cute idea. It generalizes the teaching languages, which at some point we wanted to explore, too. We dubbed this HLI as in Human-Language Interface. -- Matthias _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
