> https://sourceforge.net/p/readable/wiki/Solution/
> "A leading quote, comma, backquote, or comma-at, followed by space or tab, is 
> a list with that operator and the following expression."
>
> Of course, if you think that's a bad idea, then let's discuss!  This is 
> straight from SRFI-49..

It's not this rule in particular, but the spec as a whole seems quite
complex. http://www.dwheeler.com/readable/version02.html is quite
long, and it includes this wormhole to the universe of SRFI 49, which
the reader must also understand. It might be a useful exercise to
inline SRFI's rules into v0.3 and try to organize them to be shorter
and simpler. v0.2 tries to be both a tutorial and a spec, and I think
that makes it too intimidating. Lose the motivation, assume that the
reader is already on board by the time (s)he gets to that page, etc.,
etc.

---

GROUP doesn't seem worth the extra complexity required to explain it
to others. If you have a list with a nested list as its first
element.. just add parens. We don't need alternate syntax for every
possible situation.

Some of the burden of being readable must fall also to the user of our
notation. If lists in function position are hard to read we need
incentives to avoid them.

Is sweet expressions trying to make lisp syntax familiar to
non-lispers? With wart I wasn't trying to make the notation look
familiar, just to make it easier to read at length. I was trying to
keep my readers reading when they don't have the fluency to parse all
the parens just yet.

Dijkstra said we shouldn't teach novel ideas by making them seem
familiar: http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~EWD/transcriptions/EWD10xx/EWD1036.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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

Reply via email to