On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 9:40 AM, Matthew Butterick <m...@mbtype.com> wrote:
>
> T as in "text":
>
> @-form => T-form
> @-expression = > T-expression (or t-exp in shorthand)
(Or "Texprs"...)
> #lang at-exp racket => #lang t-exp racket
>
> #lang scribble/text => #lang t-exp/text
>
> #lang scribble/html => #lang t-exp/html
>
> Keep the old @-names for backward compatability of course.
That sounds pretty good -- it follows the original intention of these
being a convenient and uniform syntax for "text-rich expressions".
That's if there's enough collective will-power to change it now...
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Greg Trzeciak <gtrzec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> IMHO the "text expression" does precisely the same as current use of
> scribble -> pigeonholing the syntax for one use: in the case of
> scribble it is "documentation" in the case of text - "text
> processing".
It's fine for just "text", without the "processing" -- since the idea
does revolve around text in code in all kinds of way.s
> - You can place the expression "AT ANY PLACE inside your text or code"
> - Expression is identified by the selected identifier "AT THE FRONT of
> the expression" -> default @
> - With at-exp the function is "AT THE FRONT followed by
> brackets/braces"
> Ok maybe stretching it a bit but each to their own.
Yeah, I think that this is stretching it... I think that it's perfectly
fine to stick with "@" or "at" for historical reasons, but the confusion
is certainly there, and that's not new.
--
((x=>x(x))(x=>x(x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
