Are we done? Are other changes needed to maximize adoption? David A. Wheeler (16 Sep 2012 19:49 UTC)
Re: Are we done? Are other changes needed to maximize adoption? Alan Manuel Gloria (17 Sep 2012 00:25 UTC)
Re: Are we done? Are other changes needed to maximize adoption? David A. Wheeler (17 Sep 2012 00:52 UTC)
Re: Are we done? Are other changes needed to maximize adoption? David A. Wheeler (17 Sep 2012 01:17 UTC)
Re: Are we done? Are other changes needed to maximize adoption? David A. Wheeler (17 Sep 2012 00:30 UTC)
Re: Are we done? Are other changes needed to maximize adoption? Per Bothner (17 Sep 2012 00:41 UTC)
Re: Are we done? Are other changes needed to maximize adoption? David A. Wheeler (17 Sep 2012 01:32 UTC)
Re: Are we done? Are other changes needed to maximize adoption? Alan Manuel Gloria (19 Sep 2012 01:35 UTC)
Re: Are we done? Are other changes needed to maximize adoption? David A. Wheeler (18 Sep 2012 02:45 UTC)

Re: Are we done? Are other changes needed to maximize adoption? Per Bothner 17 Sep 2012 00:39 UTC

On 09/16/2012 05:30 PM, David A. Wheeler wrote:
> If you're allowed to *change* the syntax of Scheme (e.g., to make indentation syntactically important) I think you can do more

You might find this interesting:
http://per.bothner.com/blog/2010/Q2-extensible-syntax/

This is an experimental intermediate step, creating a pseudo-Scheme
with infix, indentation. and parentheses uses purely for grouping.
If I wanted to design a complete new syntax, I would probably change
more, starting with some of the predefined keywords (including define).

If you're curious to play with it, just run Kawa with the --q2 flag.
There are some examples in the gnu/q2/testsuite directory of the
Kawa source distribution, though some of these test edge-cases
rather than recommended syntax.
--
	--Per Bothner
xxxxxx@bothner.com   http://per.bothner.com/