Re: Should we MAY a "curly-write" and "neoteric-write"? Or even "sweet-write"?

Show/hide message thread

Should we MAY a "curly-write" and "neoteric-write"? Or even "sweet-write"? David A. Wheeler (09 Apr 2013 21:56 UTC)

Re: Should we MAY a "curly-write" and "neoteric-write"? Or even "sweet-write"? Mark H Weaver (09 Apr 2013 23:35 UTC)

Re: Should we MAY a "curly-write" and "neoteric-write"? Or even "sweet-write"? David A. Wheeler (10 Apr 2013 00:14 UTC)

Re: Should we MAY a "curly-write" and "neoteric-write"? Or even "sweet-write"? David A. Wheeler (10 Apr 2013 00:24 UTC)

Re: Should we MAY a "curly-write" and "neoteric-write"? Or even "sweet-write"? David A. Wheeler (10 Apr 2013 04:11 UTC)

Re: Should we MAY a "curly-write" and "neoteric-write"? Or even "sweet-write"? John Cowan (10 Apr 2013 01:56 UTC)

Re: Should we MAY a "curly-write" and "neoteric-write"? Or even "sweet-write"? David A. Wheeler (10 Apr 2013 03:00 UTC)

Re: Should we MAY a "curly-write" and "neoteric-write"? Or even "sweet-write"? John Cowan (10 Apr 2013 06:29 UTC)

Re: Should we MAY a "curly-write" and "neoteric-write"? Or even "sweet-write"? David A. Wheeler (11 Apr 2013 02:26 UTC)

Re: Should we MAY a "curly-write" and "neoteric-write"? Or even "sweet-write"? David A. Wheeler (11 Apr 2013 22:37 UTC)

First cut at "curly-write" and "neoteric-write" with -shared and -cyclic versions David A. Wheeler (14 Apr 2013 22:29 UTC)

Draft updated SRFI-110 and reference implementation David A. Wheeler (15 Apr 2013 04:09 UTC)

Re: First cut at "curly-write" and "neoteric-write" with -shared and -cyclic versions Beni Cherniavsky-Paskin (02 May 2013 08:00 UTC)

Re: First cut at "curly-write" and "neoteric-write" with -shared and -cyclic versions David A. Wheeler (02 May 2013 22:46 UTC)

Re: First cut at "curly-write" and "neoteric-write" with -shared and -cyclic versions David A. Wheeler (14 May 2013 00:47 UTC)

Re: Should we MAY a "curly-write" and "neoteric-write"? Or even "sweet-write"? Mark H Weaver 09 Apr 2013 23:34 UTC

"David A. Wheeler" <xxxxxx@dwheeler.com> writes:
> should we suggest also including "write" procedures?

Such procedures would have to include very complicated heuristics to
decide when to use traditional s-expressions, when to use curly-infix,
when to use neoteric, etc.  The heuristics would have to make
assumptions based on the symbol names.  Personally, I think it would be
very hard to produce good output.

    Regards,
      Mark