Hi pd, Erik, > several lisps : > > ... > > `(1 ,(+ 2 4) 3) -> (1 8 3) > > ... > Both backquote and comma are already read-macros in picolisp, so that's a > no go > at the language level.
Right. And in PicoLisp they are probably more often used than 'fill' (i.e. backquote in other Lisps). I would not want to waste a precious character like comma for fill. It is the read macro for language localization, so it precedes *every* string in an application (e.g. (ht:Prin ,"Hello"). > Alex, does the new tilde functionality mean that backquote is now > technically > redundant? I would not say so. It is needed in cases like : (1 `(list (hex "41") (hex "42")) 9) -> (1 (65 66) 9) where "~" would otherwise require one more layer of nesting $: (1 ~(list (list (hex "41") (hex "42"))) 9) -> (1 (65 66) 9) $: (1 (~(list (hex "41") (hex "42"))) 9) -> (1 (65 66) 9) But right, for simple, known, atomic values ` and ~ are equivalent now: : (1 `(hex "1000000") 99999) -> (1 16777216 99999) $: (1 ~(hex "1000000") 99999) -> (1 16777216 99999) ☺/ A!ex -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe
