On 1/17/13, David A. Wheeler <dwhee...@dwheeler.com> wrote: > (library > (amkg animals (1 0)) > (export cat (rename (rover dog))) > (import (only (amkg pets (1 0)) rover)) > (define cat (quote meow))) > > > Is that what you expected?
Yes ^^ On 1/17/13, David A. Wheeler <dwhee...@dwheeler.com> wrote: >> Personally I'm not (yet?) a big fan of $. > > Not a problem. It's grown on me. Once you have it, you find that patterns > where it applies are remarkably common. (^^)v >> I'm not against having a way to restart indentation; I just wanted to >> keep >> the *option* to not restart it to 0, as a matter of taste. >> Though in light of empty comments always being available, I'm ok with a >> construct that always forces indent to 0, if it's simpler. > > It's much simpler. There are some nasty subtleties in *starting* with a > non-zero indent and trying to make it "mean the obvious" in a Lisp-based > language; see the draft SRFI for more details if you're curious. It could > work in other languages, but in Scheme, it's hard because (1) the "read" > interface of Scheme is already fixed, and (2) standard Scheme doesn't > support unlimited unread-char. *Technically* R5RS and R6RS don't support unread-char, at all. However, most implementations of Scheme support some kind of unread-char, and some of them only support a 1-character unread-char. So we have adopted the limitation of requiring only 1 character lookahead, which can be done by using (let ((c (read-char port))) (unread-char c port) c). >> Another very unbaked idea: perhaps we can take a hint from typography and >> formats such as reStructuredText, markdown and emacs outline-mode (which >> all took that hint): >> Represent most structure using indentation, but some structure above that >> using several levels of headings. > > Not a crazy idea, but that would only deal with the case for multi-line that > begins on the left edge. That wouldn't deal with the "small let" case, or > anything that has some simple prefix. I know you don't care about "short > let", but *I* do :-). An interesting idea IMO. Hmm. >> I think like this direction on aesthetic grounds, but I suspect the >> practical convenience of having some reader macro entering the t-expr >> parser in the middle of s-expr parsing will prevail. > > Yes, that's my thinking too. > > --- David A. Wheeler > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS, > MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current > with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft > MVPs and experts. ON SALE this month only -- learn more at: > http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122712 > _______________________________________________ > Readable-discuss mailing list > Readable-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/readable-discuss > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS, MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft MVPs and experts. ON SALE this month only -- learn more at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122712 _______________________________________________ Readable-discuss mailing list Readable-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/readable-discuss
