Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   ɗ𐐩ʃƕρʋ (deshipu@fosstodon.org)'s status on Tuesday, 13-Feb-2024 07:42:18 JST ɗ𐐩ʃƕρʋ

   What if we made the syntax od LISP more pythonic?

   • Embed this notice
     tech? no! man, see... (technomancy@icosahedron.website)'s status on Tuesday, 13-Feb-2024 07:42:16 JST tech? no! man, see...

     in reply to

     • sourcecode jerk

     @deshipu @pho4cexa back when I still subscribed to the Clojure mailing list, this was proposed about every six months by newcomers

   • Embed this notice
     ɗ𐐩ʃƕρʋ (deshipu@fosstodon.org)'s status on Tuesday, 13-Feb-2024 07:42:17 JST ɗ𐐩ʃƕρʋ

     in reply to

     • sourcecode jerk

     @pho4cexa No, but I meant this as a bad joke. In hindsight, I shoild have known better.

   • Embed this notice
     sourcecode jerk (pho4cexa@tiny.tilde.website)'s status on Tuesday, 13-Feb-2024 07:42:18 JST sourcecode jerk

     in reply to

     @deshipu seen wisp? https://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-119/srfi-119.html

   • Embed this notice
     tech? no! man, see... (technomancy@icosahedron.website)'s status on Tuesday, 13-Feb-2024 07:43:27 JST tech? no! man, see...

     in reply to

     • sourcecode jerk

     @deshipu @pho4cexa one of the great things about Fennel is that no one will ever make this suggestion for Fennel, because "non-sexp syntax for Fennel" is just Lua

   • Embed this notice
     tech? no! man, see... (technomancy@icosahedron.website)'s status on Tuesday, 13-Feb-2024 07:46:56 JST tech? no! man, see...

     in reply to

     • sourcecode jerk

     @deshipu @pho4cexa that's true; I should clarify that people were proposing this as "I finally figured out the reason that lisp isn't popular, and if we just fix this problem of parens then it will be popular"

     Fennel is immune that particular brand of suggestion but not necessarily others

   • Embed this notice
     ɗ𐐩ʃƕρʋ (deshipu@fosstodon.org)'s status on Tuesday, 13-Feb-2024 07:46:57 JST ɗ𐐩ʃƕρʋ

     in reply to

     • tech? no! man, see...
     • sourcecode jerk

     @technomancy @pho4cexa There can be more than one non-sexp syntaxes (syntices? English is weird). That's the whole point of s-expressions.

   • Embed this notice
     ɗ𐐩ʃƕρʋ (deshipu@fosstodon.org)'s status on Tuesday, 13-Feb-2024 08:00:09 JST ɗ𐐩ʃƕρʋ

     in reply to

     • tech? no! man, see...
     • sourcecode jerk

     @technomancy @pho4cexa To be honest, I wouldn't mind a dialect of LISP that recognizes that there are several kinds of parens possible, and makes use of them.

   • Embed this notice
     tech? no! man, see... (technomancy@icosahedron.website)'s status on Tuesday, 13-Feb-2024 08:00:09 JST tech? no! man, see...

     in reply to

     • sourcecode jerk

     @deshipu @pho4cexa clojure is much better at this than the Ancient Lisps; that said I've been very tempted to add «» as string delimiters

   • Embed this notice
     ɗ𐐩ʃƕρʋ (deshipu@fosstodon.org)'s status on Tuesday, 13-Feb-2024 08:13:35 JST ɗ𐐩ʃƕρʋ

     in reply to

     • tech? no! man, see...
     • sourcecode jerk

     @technomancy @pho4cexa I need to look at it one of these days, but JVM? :-(

   • Embed this notice
     tech? no! man, see... (technomancy@icosahedron.website)'s status on Tuesday, 13-Feb-2024 08:13:35 JST tech? no! man, see...

     in reply to

     • sourcecode jerk

     @deshipu @pho4cexa yeah, totally understandable

     the good news is that basically every lisp that has been created since Clojure was released has copied this particular aspect so now you see [] and {} everywhere, including Fennel

   • Embed this notice
     tech? no! man, see... (technomancy@icosahedron.website)'s status on Tuesday, 13-Feb-2024 08:13:51 JST tech? no! man, see...

     in reply to

     • sourcecode jerk

     @deshipu @pho4cexa (I just mentioned Clojure because it was the first and most influential)