Four hours ago, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
> I will assert something about readability:
>
> Racket programs look heavy when compared with Haskell programs.
>
> This is probably true for Python instead of Haskell, too. It is also
> true for ML. I conjecture that part of that heaviness comes from
> wide lines, long names, deep nesting. Who knows. I don't even know
> how to measure this kind of property.
>
> At this point, I can express certain ideas more easily in Racket
> than in Haskell, Python, ML or whatever, which is why I am fine. But
> if this advantage ever disappeared, heaviness would definitely be a
> factor to weigh.
+1 in general.
More specifically, shortening `define' to `def' does sound like an
improvement, but a minor one compared to possible other changes around
definition forms. (In addition, it's not just a straightforward
change, since `define' has many relatives.)
--
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!
____________________
Racket Users list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
