Why not create a klingon version ?
> How about using a and b instead of ( ) so we could have faab which would be > the equivalent of (f a) so it would rule out symbolnames with an a in any > place but the first it, also we could go for less used characters as I don't > know ¥ and µ for example so that would not be half as fun I think. > -- > Heinz N. Gies > he...@licenser.net > http://licenser.net > > On Dec 29, 2011, at 18:03, Mark Rathwell wrote: > > > The thing about lisps, though, is that code and data are represented > > with the same structure. Adding sugar that makes them appear to be > > different things would not help anyone, especially the beginner. It > > will make grasping macros, among other things, much more difficult > > down the road. Getting used to the syntax is, for practical reasons, > > a necessary, and short, process, and giving new users a way to bypass > > that would hurt more than it helps. (Not to mention the effect on > > experienced users of having to now deal with this additional syntax in > > code in the wild.) > > > > That said, don't let me stop you from having fun and learning with > > this little experiment ;) > > > > On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Louis Yu Lu <louisy...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > >> Agree on looking from the angle of data structure and their internal > >> presentation. But conceptually, [] and {} are just syntax sugars: > >> [x y] -> (vector x y) > >> {x y} -> (hash-map x y) > >> #{x y} -> (hash-set x y) > >> The 2 element structures are all become 3 element lists. > >> > >> Louis > >> > >> On Dec 29, 7:03 am, James Reeves <jree...@weavejester.com> wrote: > >>> On 29 December 2011 04:49, Louis Yu Lu <louisy...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Instead of using overloaded (), may be f[x] will cause less > >>> > >>>> trouble, > >>>> and more inline with clojure's syntax as [ ] already being used for > >>>> defining the arguments of the function. > >>> > >>> I think you need to look at this from a slightly different angle. > >>> > >>> In Clojure, as in all Lisps, code is represented by data structures -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
