[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: XML as a transition to s-expr
None of the users saw parens. I'm not saying that
average programmers couldn't like Lisp, just that the
max you have to hide to make them like it are the parens.
Which is a nontrivial discovery because RTML is prefix,
except for math.
--- Bruce Lewis <email@example.com> wrote:
> I tried to carefully explain in a previous message that I'm not
> interested in replacing XML for text markup. I want to leverage
> people's experience with XML/HTML to ease the transition into
> general programming with s-exprs. With BRL, people still use (X)HTML
> for static text, but use s-exprs for the dynamic parts. I thought
> was clear when ASP and PHP came up.
> This thread continues to discuss replacing XML with s-exprs for text
> markup despite my efforts. However, this message has relevance:
> Paul Graham <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Users loved RTML. That was what taught me for sure
> > (as the Dylan guys hypothesized, and the Python and Ruby
> > guys proved) that the only thing standing between Lisp
> > and even the most novice programmers was the parentheses.
> Could you tell us more about this result? The control group, the
> who also had the structure editor but were allowed to see the parens,
> how deep did the nesting get before they freaked?
> If there was no such control group, maybe you've drawn the wrong
> conclusion. Using a structure editor is not meaningfully comparable
> typing in parens without a structure editor.
> I think the only thing standing between Lisp (at least Scheme) and
> most novice programmers is an hour with a halfway-decent tutorial.
> <brlewis@[(if (brl-related? message) ; Bruce R. Lewis
> "users.sourceforge.net" ; http://brl.sourceforge.net/
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com