Scheme Programming Language :: Possible notational improvements (was: How Lisp's Nested Notation ...)


	Possible notational improvements (was: How Lisp's Nested Notation ...) Well, we see all sorts of people complaining about notations on a fairly periodic basis. But can we introduce more features/macros to the language to address some of the points regularly raised? I was thinking of using this thread to list out some of the features some of us miss in Scheme but see in other languages, and discuss ways of implementing them. I guess MANY of these 'often asked for' features can be well implemented in macros. Some others, similar to the quasiquote, "@," may be implemented as new syntaxes ... in case it helps to improve readability and/or writability of frequently used codes to a significant extent. But please, if you have a feature in mind ... suggest more of how it can be implemented, or give us concrete practical codes that may benifit from it. I really wont like to see another thread with long arguements about whether or not 'its right' for such syntax changes. Those who dont like the changes may simply ignore it ... this is just a thread of suggestions, not a standardized document. But yes, if given suggestions seem to interfere/conflict with commonly written codes, anyone is welcome to point that out. In short, constructive posts only, please! Reasamp - Hide quoted text - On Sun, 5 May 2007, Reasamp wrote: > Well, we see all sorts of people complaining about notations on a > fairly periodic basis. But can we introduce more features/macros to > the language to address some of the points regularly raised? > I was thinking of using this thread to list out some of the features > some of us miss in Scheme but see in other languages, and discuss ways > of implementing them. I guess MANY of these 'often asked for' features > can be well implemented in macros. Some others, similar to the > quasiquote, "@," may be implemented as new syntaxes ... in case it > helps to improve readability and/or writability of frequently used > codes to a significant extent. > But please, if you have a feature in mind ... suggest more of how it > can be implemented, or give us concrete practical codes that may > benifit from it. Well, thats what I did with my 1. of April R7RS posting, although non (I think) of those features is best implemented or even possible to implement on top of RxRS scheme as macros or functions: http://tinyurl.com/385wcw The implementation in that post is actually real (although hacked together in a hurry).