On 14 Jun 2009, at 14:55, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
Matthew Flatt wrote at 06/14/2009 09:34 AM:
I see no substantial technical advantage for any of the choices of
syntax, but there's a significant advantage in picking just one. All
else being equal, a single syntax makes the language easier to learn,
documentation easier to read, parsers easier to implement and extend,
etc. So, while I'm unsure that "#:" should be the syntax of keywords
forever, I'm sure that I don't want to support an additional ":"
prefix
right now.
While I think ":" is superior to "#:", I would not advocate
switching to ":" if doing so meant breaking code that used "#:".
Except perhaps in a major new PLT release (e.g., 5.0).
+1 to this.
I wasn't a massive fan of '#:' initially, but it makes some kind of
aesthetic sense along side other reader syntax like #t, #px, #s and so
on.
Changing things now (or in the future) for the sake of a single
character would be lots of work for very little gain.
_________________________________________________
For list-related administrative tasks:
http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-dev
