Ok I'm caught up on this thread, at least. The idea of suppressing paren-insertion inside explicit parens is a good one. I had considered it, but I hadn't noticed that it allows me to get rid of the single-space rule. I'm going to try that!
> Wart's interpreter says "Hit <enter> twice to eval." > which is our current semantic, too. Good to see that > other people come to similar conclusions as we do. I just copied python :) Thanks Alan for the arc-side clarifications. You saved me the trouble :) Like David said, the rest of this message may not be too relevant to y'all. === > I can sort-of see the point of a special notation for "not"; Arc does that > too. Actually arc doesn't have that. The prefix '!' is a wart idea. > ~(f()) => (~ (f)) > !(f()) => (! (f)) > not(f()) => (not (f)) My immediate reaction is that that's *way* too many parens. Contrast how I define pair at http://github.com/akkartik/wart/blob/4dd1f19fdf/032bind.wart#L4 > (foo:bar:nitz:quux a) > > gets converted, NOT to compose, but instead to: > > (foo (bar (nitz (quux a)))) Yes that's true in arc. Since wart has first-class macros, this: ((compose foo bar) x) is identical to this: (foo (bar x)) > andf is slightly different - it's NOT and. andf is a higher-order function: Yep. > I notice that the wart notation doesn't support "or" (!). Yeah arc's observation was that at the level of functions we want to 'and' far more often than we want to 'or'. I've been watching for signs that we need syntax for 'orf' but so far haven't found any. Counter-examples most appreciated. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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
