> Uhm. What you call GRIT *is* SPLIT. Ugh, I'm an idiot. That's what I get for trying to come up with new approaches on-the-keyboard. I tried some alternative ways of combining things, kept fiddling, and ended up circling back :-).
That said, I think my alternative rule for SYMBOL-at-beginning, followed by something, *IS* subtly different - i.e., it's ALWAYS a list, even if there's only one datum in the end. Different isn't necessarily better, though. Maybe that handles "let" better? At this point, I'm trying to brainstorm different approaches that *might* be useful, so if we come up with a few stupid ideas on the way to a great new one, that's fine. > Hence my continued position: SPLIT (to support :keyword-style > juxtaposition pairings) and ENLIST (to support (k v)-style explicit > pairings), using two different symbols. > You can drop ENLIST, maybe, because SPLIT-by-itself can do part of its > work, at the cost of adding one vertical line, but ENLIST can't do > SPLIT's work, which is to juxtapose an "indented" line (i.e. to cancel > an indentation). I'm convinced of the need for a SPLIT-style semantic *between* datums on a line, and of course we need something to handle lists of lists (e.g., GROUP, SPLIT symbol on its own line, whatever). I'm not as certain of ENLIST. I'd feel better trying around different ideas for a short while first. --- David A. Wheeler ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Readable-discuss mailing list Readable-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/readable-discuss