Group Email Manager

login signup
#!curly-infix vs. #!srfi-105 David A. Wheeler (10 Sep 2012 01:09 UTC)
Re: #!curly-infix vs. #!srfi-105 Shiro Kawai (10 Sep 2012 18:29 UTC)
Re: #!curly-infix vs. #!srfi-105 Alan Manuel Gloria (12 Sep 2012 03:38 UTC)
Re: #!curly-infix vs. #!srfi-105 David A. Wheeler (14 Sep 2012 03:26 UTC)
Re: #!curly-infix vs. #!srfi-105 Shiro Kawai 10 Sep 2012 18:26 UTC 
+1 for #!curly-infix

>From: "David A. Wheeler" <xxxxxx@dwheeler.com>
Subject: #!curly-infix vs. #!srfi-105
Date: Sun, 09 Sep 2012 21:09:55 -0400 (EDT)

> On the guile-devel mailing list I got another input preferring #!curly-infix over #!srfi-105.
>
> Sjoerd van Leent Privé (...svanleent *AT* gmail.com) said:
>> I believe it is information versus information. I believe strongly that
> a notion of #!curly-infix would be more readable than #!srfi-105. The
> latter doesn't explain at all why the file looks drastically different,
> whereas a notion of #!curly-infix (or #!sweet-scheme, #!scheme for the
> same reason) is more understandable.
>
> Other thoughts?
>
> --- David A. Wheeler
>