Spoiled is an understatement. I wrote a lot of programs in debug (DOS). And
it was nice! Turbo Pascal was what really spoiled me. :) I miss the in-line asm
days.
Dex
> On May 3, 2020, at 9:46 PM, George Neuner wrote:
>
>
>> On 5/2/2020 4:58 AM, Dexter Lagan wrote:
>> For the sake of
On 5/2/2020 4:58 AM, Dexter Lagan wrote:
For the sake of discussion, here’s a long rant:
I might have a very uninformed opinion here, but wouldn’t having
significant white space and no scope-defining character amount to
multiple spaces and line feeds being part of the syntax? The next
Quick question: Would it better if this discussion happened over at
https://github.com/racket/rhombus-brainstorming/blob/master/resources/goals.md
or on the Racket Slack #rhombus channel?
I’m aware that email and slack is a bit ephemeral - it is probably a good idea
to turn any proposals into
For the sake of discussion, here’s a long rant:
I might have a very uninformed opinion here, but wouldn’t having significant
white space and no scope-defining character amount to multiple spaces and line
feeds being part of the syntax? The next best thing being, allowing semicolons
in
On Fri, May 1, 2020, 11:25 PM Raoul Duke wrote:
> $0.02, whitespace sensitivity is just bad ux in the long run. haskell can
> get away with it more than python because haskell can be written more
> concisely i feel than python. but even in H it is sorta unfortunate.
>
> i like how iirc clojure
$0.02, whitespace sensitivity is just bad ux in the long run. haskell can
get away with it more than python because haskell can be written more
concisely i feel than python. but even in H it is sorta unfortunate.
i like how iirc clojure uses sexprs but allows other kinds of parens,
fairly
Any one consider this style? Minimizing visual interference while
preserving parentheses. Even Java program can be written like Python.
[image: main-qimg-8d66f35cd3da4c55a380d0d08c11d930.png]
On 5/1/2020 4:35 PM, Dexter Lagan wrote:
Is there value in Rob Pike’s comment on avoiding significant white
space in the Go language?
“We have had extensive experience tracking down build and test
failures caused by cross-language builds where a Python snippet
embedded in another
Is there value in Rob Pike’s comment on avoiding significant white space in
the Go language?
“We have had extensive experience tracking down build and test failures caused
by cross-language builds where a Python snippet embedded in another language,
for instance through a SWIG invocation, is
I haven't followed all the discussion regarding a potential successor to
Racket. AFAIHS, no one actually has suggested a required indentation
scheme ala Python, but since source indentation (and formatting in
general) currently is under discussion, I wanted to make known my
feelings on the
Sorawee Porncharoenwase writes:
>>
>> I hate being at the mercy of whatever editor I'm stuck using.
>
>
> I agree with this in principle, but in practice, it's really a matter of
> what mainstream editors support. Editors in the past don't universally
> support automatic indentation, and I could
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 02:40:00PM -0700, Sorawee Porncharoenwase wrote:
>
> This is Nia's parendown: https://docs.racket-lang.org/parendown/index.html
Just wondering: Is there a way to write division if Nia's parendown is in
effect?
There would be no problem with this if it was originally
Thanks for sharing. I see "Nested parentheses" only one way to represent
tree structure. There are certainly other cleverer ways to do it. Once it
appears, the representation of the tree transform (macro) may also be
better. I'm looking forward to seeing better representation.
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 02:40:00PM -0700, Sorawee Porncharoenwase wrote:
> >
> > I hate being at the mercy of whatever editor I'm stuck using.
>
>
> I agree with this in principle, but in practice, it's really a matter of
> what mainstream editors support. Editors in the past don't universally
>
On 4/30/2020 5:40 PM, Sorawee Porncharoenwase wrote:
:
To clarify what I mean: non S-exp languages usually have a line as a
unit of code, so editors need to support "jump to the beginning/end of
line" to make editing pleasant.
Actually, in the majority of programming languages there is
>
> I hate being at the mercy of whatever editor I'm stuck using.
I agree with this in principle, but in practice, it's really a matter of
what mainstream editors support. Editors in the past don't universally
support automatic indentation, and I could imagine a criticism like
"Indentation
No it’s not, I checked again and couldn’t reproduce the problem. Please
ignore my earlier comment.
I’ve been tracking a bug that causes the colouring of a part of the code as
comment and disable parenthesis handling, and since I switch debugging on and
off often, I assumed it was related.
On Thu, 30 Apr 2020 at 20:01, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> [...]
> > Also is there a programming editor that *won't* do parenthesis matching?
>
> Evidently the Racket editor whan debugging is disabled,
I’m not sure that’s true.
Kind regards
Stephen
--
--
You received this message because
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 02:46:00PM -0400, David Storrs wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 11:16 AM Hendrik Boom
> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 09:36:15AM +0200, Dexter Lagan wrote:
> > > There’s one thing I noticed: if debugging is disabled, then
> > parenthesis highlighting is also
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 11:16 AM Hendrik Boom
wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 09:36:15AM +0200, Dexter Lagan wrote:
> > There’s one thing I noticed: if debugging is disabled, then
> parenthesis highlighting is also disabled (as well as other visual aids, if
> I remember well?). The editor
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 09:36:15AM +0200, Dexter Lagan wrote:
> There’s one thing I noticed: if debugging is disabled, then parenthesis
> highlighting is also disabled (as well as other visual aids, if I remember
> well?). The editor also feels faster because of this, but navigating
>
21 matches
Mail list logo
