It's unclear to me whether or not that was meant as a compliment, but I do
also find it amusing. :-)

Cheers,
   Kevin

On Sunday, March 22, 2015, Sheehan Olver <[email protected]> wrote:

> I quite like this comment from the Stack Exchange :)
>
> "Julia programmers are "special" in a way that other programmers aren't.
> An obsessive preoccupation with the @ sign is only the beginning. Beware.
>  –  Sam Axe <http://stackoverflow.com/users/74015/sam-axe> yesterday
> <http://stackoverflow.com/questions/29182447/why-do-julia-programmers-need-to-prefix-macros-with-the-at-sign#comment46581039_29182447>
> "
>
> On Sunday, March 22, 2015 at 12:08:16 PM UTC+11, Gregor R. wrote:
>>
>> Hello @all,
>>
>> I'm basically interested in the rationale behind using @ for macros like
>> @assert and @time and so on.
>>
>> Personally, I think that using lots of macros clutters the otherwise very
>> likable Julia code.
>> Also what is the purpose behind using @? I mean macro expansion is a pre
>> compilation step, i.e. it's
>> basically text substitution, or isn't it?
>>
>> Why does Julia choose this unique way of representing macros and not e.g.
>> a convention like uppercase letters or even no
>> indication that it's a macro?
>>
>> I already asked this question on stackoverflow: http://stackoverflow.com/
>> questions/29182447/why-do-julia-programmers-need-to-
>> prefix-macros-with-the-at-sign
>>
>> I'm just curious since whenever I see I'm just wondering...
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>

Reply via email to