> > > On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 11:20 AM, Eli Barzilay <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Matthew Butterick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > The "listification" of arguments within curly braces is easily the > > aspect of Scribble syntax that trips me up the most. I understand why > > it's done that way. But for my purposes, I usually want the thing > > between curly braces to behave as a block, not as a list. > > (I think that you mean the other way -- you prefer that it does return a > list with all of the string expressions instead of silently dropping > them all except for the last one...) > Sorry, when I said "block", maybe I inadvertently suggested a `begin`-style block. What I meant is that many contexts, I end up wanting the material between curly braces to be resolved into a single string argument, with nested expressions evaluated first, not unlike the way `format` works. IOW, I don't want a list at all. Anyhow, this isn't even a quibble, much less a complaint. Just an observation that there's at least one other useful way to parse the contents of a Scribble text body. (BTW, in one of the last experiments I had with the syntax, I made > @foo{bar} read as something like (dispatch foo ("bar")) with the idea of > allowing people to define a specific `dispatch' macro that does whatever > you want. But I eventually concluded that having such "hidden > identifiers" pop up as a result of reading stuff is not a good idea.) As a Scribble artiste, I like that idea. But rather than attach a dispatcher to the default curly braces, perhaps you could permit custom dispatchers to be invoked by custom delimiters.
____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
