Buddha Buck wrote:
>
> While Perl -lets- every function be well prototyped, it doesn't -require-
> every function to be well prototyped. Because of this, it might be well
> nigh impossible to eliminate all ambiguity to the compiler.
Well, right. Clearly, in those cases, you can expect to nee
On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 10:30:36AM -0500, David Grove wrote:
> Although I have no interest in saying anything supportive of this idea, I think
> it would be dreadfully funny if Python suddenly lost its primary point of
> advocacy against the Perl language just because we allowed (not required)
On Wednesday, September 27, 2000 10:21 AM, John Porter [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
wrote:
> Philip Newton wrote:
> > On 26 Sep 2000, Johan Vromans wrote:
> > >
> > > By the same reasoning, you can reduce the use of curlies by using
> > > indentation to define block structure.
> >
> > What an idea! I
Philip Newton wrote:
> On 26 Sep 2000, Johan Vromans wrote:
> >
> > By the same reasoning, you can reduce the use of curlies by using
> > indentation to define block structure.
>
> What an idea! I wonder why no language has tried this before.
It's a question of what the language allows vs. what
Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Readability is a programmer feature, not a language feature.
The most important optimization a programmer can make is to optimize
for understanding.
--
Piers
On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 09:52:57AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> You know, I'm trying to see what's annoying about all those
> parentheses in the lisp function and what do you know, I can't see
> anything wrong. Okay, so it's not Perl syntax, but it's still clear
> what's going on.
I'd go further
* Philip Newton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [27 Sep 2000 19:54]:
> On 26 Sep 2000, Johan Vromans wrote:
[...]
> > By the same reasoning, you can reduce the use of curlies by using
> > indentation to define block structure.
> What an idea! I wonder why no language has tried this before.
I realise you're
Robert Mathews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Simon Cozens wrote:
> > (defun Schwartzian (func list)
> > (mapcar
> >(lambda (x) (car x))
> >(sort
> > (mapcar
> > (lambda (x) (cons x (funcall func x)))
> > list
> > )
> > (lambda (x y) (< (cdr x) (cdr y)))
> > )
On 26 Sep 2000, Johan Vromans wrote:
> Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > so fewer "cluttering"
> > parentheses are needed to make things readable while still being correct.
>
> Since when do parentheses make things less readable?
Each parenthesis is one "token". The more tokens y
On 26 Sep 2000, Johan Vromans wrote:
> Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > so fewer "cluttering"
> > parentheses are needed to make things readable while still being correct.
>
> By the same reasoning, you can reduce the use of curlies by using
> indentation to define block structur
Simon Cozens wrote:
>
> Maybe you'd prefer this:
>
> defun Schwartzian func list mapcar lambda x car x sort mapcar
> lambda x cons x funcall func x list lambda x y < cdr x cdr y
What happened to the newlines?
Also, "no parens" is not the only alternative to having parens.
Other punctiation is
Simon Cozens wrote:
> (defun Schwartzian (func list)
> (mapcar
>(lambda (x) (car x))
>(sort
> (mapcar
> (lambda (x) (cons x (funcall func x)))
> list
> )
> (lambda (x y) (< (cdr x) (cdr y)))
> )
>)
> )
>
> Maybe you'd prefer this:
>
> defun Schwartzian
On Tue, Sep 26, 2000 at 02:06:47PM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> > Since when do parentheses make things less readable?
>
> Can you say "lisp"?
"lisp".
(defun Schwartzian (func list)
(mapcar
(lambda (x) (car x))
(sort
(mapcar
(lambda (x) (cons x (funcall func x)))
list
On Sat, 23 Sep 2000, raptor wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 Sep 2000, Tom Christiansen wrote:
> >
> > > =item perl6storm #0050
> > >
> > > Radical notion: consider removing precedence.
> > > Wrong precedence makes people miserable.
> What if we have these 2 rules or no rules AND we can set manualy the
>
> On Thu, 21 Sep 2000, Tom Christiansen wrote:
>
> > =item perl6storm #0050
> >
> > Radical notion: consider removing precedence.
> > Wrong precedence makes people miserable.
>
> (Some people already suggest that Perl only has two precedence rules: (1)
> multiplication and division come before add
15 matches
Mail list logo
