Hi David,

Am Sonntag, 8. Juni 2014, 18:05:53 schrieb David A. Wheeler:
> A few comments, though, besides ones already made.  I have concerns that lone 
> ":" is actually *widely* used for other purposes, e.g., type declarations, 
> that this syntax interferes with.  Similarly, "_" has many uses on its own.  
> I think it'd be wise to grab a bunch of code and try to reformat it this way. 
>  I did that a *LOT* to create SRFI-110; a lot of syntax that SEEMS like a 
> good idea doesn't actually work well with real code.

For _ this should not be too bad: It only has a special meaning in wisp when 
used as the very first character in a line (then the underscore and consecutive 
underscores are treated as whitespace).

For : I am not perfectly sure. I know that typed racket uses it for 
type-declarations┬╣, so this is a regression. On the other hand this only hurts 
for top-level defines, where it is seldomly needed. I added some details under 
http://draketo.de/proj/wisp/srfi.html#sec-3-2 (disadvantages of wisp).


Best wishes,

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and
search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck®
Code Sight™ - the same software that powers the world's largest code
search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now.
Readable-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to