[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: XML as a transition to s-expr
Michael Vanier wrote:
> I don't see this as an issue. Almost any decent editor will do
People do NOT like to be told that they need to change their tools (or,
often, learn to use their tools more effectively) to use a new language.
> ... Most people do find )))))))) at the end of functions
> pretty distracting, but you learn to tune it out.
If code is first and foremost a form of speech then what is the use
putting in things that are distracting and that users must learn to tune
> You could write a macro which does this e.g.
> (multi-if (test1 then action1)
> else (test2 then action2)
> else (test3 then action3)
> else (action4))
We're talking about newbies. Newbies want
a) to code in a language that is already optimized for their needs
b) to be able to read other people's code.
In other words they want the standard syntax to be newbie-friendly.
but I doubt anyone would use it. After a while you just don't notice
> like this.
We're talking about newbies. After a while they aren't newbies anymore.
> ... If
> you don't like this, feel free to do this:
> (define all-but-the-first-two-elements cddr)
And how will I read other people's code? Newbies do not go around
redefining standard functions. They either find the langauge easy or
they don't. They don't customize it to be easy.
> Your first point is the crucial one (more below). The second one is
> trivial; just use a vector. You *can* program imperatively in scheme just
> as well as in python.
Are vectors usable everywhere that lists are in Scheme, or do you have
to do manual conversion back and forth? Once again, doing things the
"easy way" takes more knowledge than just figuring out the hard
> Well, you'll never get universal agreement in that community, so I see no
> problem with using a particular implementation as long as it's well
Will there be many third-party books and tutorials that will teach me
how to solve problems with *that particular implementation*? That's the
problem with splitting a language community among distribution lines.
> ... Libraries are vital, but if enough people like the language
> enough to want to use it, the libraries will follow.
Maybe. I'm not convinced. There too many great languages out there. Not
many would choose one that requires them to reinvent wheels.