This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 110 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 110 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
> -----Original Message----- > From: David A. Wheeler [mailto:dwheeler@xxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: lunes, 27 de mayo de 2013 2:00 > To: stone > Cc: srfi-110 > Subject: Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic > snip > > Lisps already have a perfectly serviceable visible pair of symbols > for grouping, namely, parentheses. The problem is with their overuse. > Since EVERYTHING is grouped with parentheses, it can be hard > for humans > to tell when you're ending one thing versus another. E.G., > when there are > 6 closing parentheses, it's hard to tell that it should be 7. > People can visually match 2, or maybe 3 pairs, but not 10 or 12. I am in favor of SRFI-110, for it might be very useful for people who don't like parentheses. For myself I probably stick to parentheses. I have no problems with lots of parentheses. Although I think that indentation oriented notation can be useful for many people, I do not well undestand David's remark about difficulties with 10 or 12 closing parentheses. Where with conventional parentheses you have to type the correct number of parentheses, say 10, in a sweet expression you have to reduce the indentation by 10 steps, which to me seems as hard, especially when the start of the subexpression to be closed is too far above to be visible on the screen. For Scheme editing I use DrRacket. It has a customizable re-indent function. It highlights subexpressions when placing the curser right before an opening or right after a closing parenthesis. It is easy to jump forward and backward over subexpressions. When typing a closing parenthesis, the editor for a moment shows which opening parenthesis you are closing, even when lots of lines above. I think the same type of editing tools would be useful for sweet expressions, but I would not know what part of f(x) to highlight or select when the cursor is at the start of the line. Should it only be f? Or should it be the whole line? I have the same type of uncertainty with: f ! x Thanks, Jos > > Lisp is called "lots of irritating superflous parentheses" > for a *reason*. > Most software developers today will *immediately* reject any > language with such poor readability. Even Lisp's creator, > John McCarthy, did not intend for s-expressions to be used > directly (!). > While some people don't like Python's indentation-based syntax, Python > is WAY more popular than Scheme or Common Lisp. In short, > Lisp's syntax greatly inhibits its use where it might be used > otherwise. > snip >