[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Tla spork

From: Mikhael Goikhman
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Tla spork
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 03:19:47 +0000
User-agent: Mutt/

On 27 Aug 2004 10:14:42 +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:
> > I really would like to understand, what's the big difference between
> > writing things as
> >
> >         if (a) { b } else { c }
> > or as
> >         (if a b c)

Nope, this would be:

  if (a1 + a2 - a3 > 0) { b1 = b2(b3 + b4) } else { c1 = c2(c3 + c4) }


  (if (> (- (+ a1 a2) a3) 0) (set b1 (b2 (+ b2 b3))) (set c1 (c2 (+ c3 c4))))

And which one is more readable?

> What's even more bizarre is that the same sort of people that decry
> sexps often seem to lerrrrv xml... :-O

This is a pretty confusing statement, since s-exps are very much like xml
and both suck.  There are more natural ways to describe things.  Just add
blocks and operator priority, rather than use mandatory opening and
closing parentheses (or brackets in xml) around each and every operator.

P.S. Like many polyglots, I don't _really_ dislike any language. :)


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]