Yes, the backtick is used for command syntax<http://docs.julialang.org/en/latest/manual/running-external-programs/>. Sometimes I think it would be really nice to have it for expression quoting since markdown has acclimatized us to using backticks for quoting code, but command syntax is way too handy to steal this from – and its interior interpolation rules are far trickier than normal quotations so you can't just use a normal string construct.
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 8:57 AM, David Moon <[email protected]> wrote: > I am not suggesting any change to :(x+y) so it would continue to be the > same as quote x+y end. I think that would return Expr(internal_symbol("+", > context), internal_symbol("x", context), internal_symbol("y", context)) to > use a sketchy syntax that might not actually be valid Julia. > > I like using the ` character for quasiquote as in Lisp but isn't Julia > already using ` for something more widely used? > > > On Tuesday, February 25, 2014 11:00:32 PM UTC-5, Fil Mackay wrote: >> >> The semantics of :symbol would not change from the *status quo* under my >>> proposal. >>> >>> Perhaps :(x) should be the same as :x rather than the same as quote x >>> end. Thus if the result of the unary : operator is just a symbol, it is >>> always an external symbol, but the *quote* special form is able to >>> produce just an internal symbol. >>> >> >> What would :(x+y) produce - invalid or quote x + y end? This "inline >> quote" format seems to be used quite a lot and handy. I have wondered about >> using a different character for symbols and quotes to avoid this ambiguity. >> >>
