|
Comment on SRFI-110 and Comparison to Genyris xyzzy
Bill Birch
(22 May 2013 15:03 UTC)
|
|
Re: Comment on SRFI-110 and Comparison to Genyris xyzzy
David A. Wheeler
(23 May 2013 13:39 UTC)
|
|
sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
John David Stone
(23 May 2013 16:08 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
John Cowan
(23 May 2013 16:19 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
John David Stone
(23 May 2013 16:32 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
David A. Wheeler
(24 May 2013 03:55 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
David A. Wheeler
(24 May 2013 03:12 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
John David Stone
(24 May 2013 15:34 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
John Cowan
(24 May 2013 20:02 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
David A. Wheeler
(24 May 2013 20:09 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
John David Stone
(24 May 2013 21:35 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
David A. Wheeler
(24 May 2013 22:40 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
John David Stone
(24 May 2013 23:13 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
David A. Wheeler
(25 May 2013 03:43 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
John Cowan
(25 May 2013 03:20 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
David A. Wheeler
(25 May 2013 04:17 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
David A. Wheeler
(25 May 2013 04:27 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
John Cowan
(25 May 2013 04:55 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
David A. Wheeler
(25 May 2013 18:14 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic John David Stone (26 May 2013 23:26 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
David A. Wheeler
(27 May 2013 00:29 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
John David Stone
(27 May 2013 15:51 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
Alan Manuel Gloria
(28 May 2013 04:28 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
David A. Wheeler
(28 May 2013 18:34 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
Beni Cherniavsky-Paskin
(26 May 2013 20:40 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
David A. Wheeler
(26 May 2013 22:43 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
David A. Wheeler
(27 May 2013 00:00 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
Alexey Radul
(27 May 2013 03:32 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
David A. Wheeler
(27 May 2013 04:44 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
Alexey Radul
(27 May 2013 05:50 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
Alan Manuel Gloria
(27 May 2013 06:34 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
David A. Wheeler
(27 May 2013 15:14 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
David A. Wheeler
(27 May 2013 13:55 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
Alexey Radul
(27 May 2013 16:27 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
John Cowan
(27 May 2013 15:55 UTC)
|
|
RE: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
Jos Koot
(27 May 2013 04:57 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
David A. Wheeler
(27 May 2013 13:37 UTC)
|
|
Re: sweet-expressions are not homoiconic
John Cowan
(27 May 2013 15:50 UTC)
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
John Cowan writes:
> If newline as a statement terminator counts as syntactically significant
> whitespace, then there are a lot bigger guns than Icon that have it,
> starting with Fortran, Cobol, and Basic, and going on to every command
> language ever created.
I'd put them in a slightly different class. They were created in
the era of punched cards (FORTRAN, COBOL) or line editors (BASIC) and so
treat the line as a natural unit. Through much of that era, there was no
such thing as a newline character; I can recall writing FORTRAN programs in
which each output line began with a format signal, directing the printer to
stay on the same line, advance one line, advance two lines, or skip to the
top of the next page.
> To bracket such languages with identation
> sensitive ones is to trivialize the concept.
I wouldn't have mentioned it at all if Wheeler hadn't used Icon as
an example in support of his argument.
> If you're worried about it, make sure all continued lines end in _,
> that's all.
Sigh. Yes, of course -- a marker character. And in FORTRAN you
can always put a C or an asterisk in column 6 of the next line. These are
evidences of _failure to achieve homoiconicity_. They are design kludges,
used to paper over the incompatibility between whitespace used for layout
and whitespace used to signal syntactic structure.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.9 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>
iEYEARECAAYFAlGimiEACgkQbBGsCPR0ElRxGACg0rHmLUT2eKdJnNIC8v7WpAK+
KTsAoNM5b5RLCzsp7RzoOoNP6DfWhfSf
=kR/G
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----