I will assert something about readability: Racket programs look heavy when compared with Haskell programs.
This is probably true for Python instead of Haskell, too. It is also true for ML. I conjecture that part of that heaviness comes from wide lines, long names, deep nesting. Who knows. I don't even know how to measure this kind of property. At this point, I can express certain ideas more easily in Racket than in Haskell, Python, ML or whatever, which is why I am fine. But if this advantage ever disappeared, heaviness would definitely be a factor to weigh. -- Matthias On May 10, 2012, at 3:49 PM, ozzloy-racket-users wrote: > i didn't assert that word length has nothing to do with readability, just > that word frequency has more impact on reading time than word length. > > On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Luke Vilnis <lvil...@gmail.com> wrote: > I can only speak for myself but I think it's a bit much to assert that word > length has nothing to do with readability. Heck, maybe that's even true for > you, but not for everyone. I have certainly felt it to be an issue. If the > "define" keyword was 50 letters long it would definitely have an impact on my > ability to read code - it seems to be an issue of degree, not existence. > > On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 3:26 PM, ozzloy-racket-users > <ozzloy+users_racket-lang_...@gmail.com> wrote: > am i the only one that thinks not having abbreviated names for anything is > good? > i like not having "def". especially if it's going to be redundant. > i see this as a slippery slope i don't want to go down. > it annoys me when switching to other languages to have to ask: which way of > shortening "function" does this language go with? was it "fn"? maybe "fun"? > if the language has a strict policy of not using short versions of words, i > don't have to guess. > > as for "def" being easier to read than "define", that's not true. word > frequency has more impact on reading time than word length for normal > reading. having more aliases makes both less frequent, so adding "def" could > plausibly make reading both take longer. most people read whole words at a > time, rather than letter-by-letter. > > > On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Grant Rettke <gret...@acm.org> wrote: > There is always pretty mode in Emacs. > > On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Ray Racine <ray.rac...@gmail.com> wrote: > > FYI for those who may not know. Racket supports λ as an alias for lambda. > > ctrl-\ in DrRacket. > > > > > > On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Nikita B. Zuev <nikit...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> +1 for `def' as alias for `define'. > >> May I also suggest `fun' for `lambda' alias? > >> Three letter names are the best =) > >> > >> (well one can always do it with require rename-in) > >> > >> -- > >> Regards, > >> Nikita B. Zuev > >> ____________________ > >> Racket Users list: > >> http://lists.racket-lang.org/users > > > > > > > > ____________________ > > Racket Users list: > > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users > > > > > > -- > http://www.wisdomandwonder.com/ > ACM, AMA, COG, IEEE > > ____________________ > Racket Users list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users > > > ____________________ > Racket Users list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users > > > > ____________________ > Racket Users list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
