Should we use prop:paren-shape instead of #%brackets #1

New Issue

2016-11-30T12:14:44Z

SuzanneSoy commented

2016-11-30 12:14:44 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Rationale:

Being able to use (), [] and {} interchangeably for better readability in Racket is a nice feature.
A few forms may want to make an explicit distinction, but these will be rare.
For those forms, we could have some simple syntax/parse pattern expanders:
- ~brackets
- ~braces
- and/or a more general ~paren-shape "⦃⦄"
- See paren-shape-pattern-expanders, which implement some of this
This was also the recommendation made to William G Hatch when he announced u-delim (use paren-shape instead of inserting new macros on the fly, so that the new delimiters can also work where the regular parentheses are expected).

I think #%dot should probably be kept, as it allows writing (a b . c d e)

See also: https://github.com/jsmaniac/remix/issues/3

Rationale: * Being able to use `()`, `[]` and `{}` interchangeably for better readability in Racket is a nice feature. * A few forms may want to make an explicit distinction, but these will be rare. * For those forms, we could have some simple `syntax/parse` pattern expanders: * `~brackets` * `~braces` * and/or a more general `~paren-shape "⦃⦄"` * See [paren-shape-pattern-expanders](http://docs.racket-lang.org/paren-shape-pattern-expanders/index.html), which implement some of this * This was also the recommendation made to William G Hatch when he announced u-delim (use paren-shape instead of inserting new macros on the fly, so that the new delimiters can also work where the regular parentheses are expected). I think `#%dot` should probably be kept, as it allows writing `(a b . c d e)` See also: https://github.com/jsmaniac/remix/issues/3

SuzanneSoy commented

2016-12-02 18:48:51 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

This issue was moved to jeapostrophe/remix#4

Sign in to join this conversation.