[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Comments on process template syntax
From: |
zimoun |
Subject: |
Re: Comments on process template syntax |
Date: |
Wed, 5 Feb 2020 16:07:03 +0100 |
Hi Ricardo,
On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 at 13:08, Ricardo Wurmus <address@hidden> wrote:
> I still think that the syntax is sub-optimal. We support Wisp to
> make the Lispiness a little easier to swallow for the skeptics. But
> the procedure case does not benefit much from Wisp — it would look worse
> if we expressed it in the Wisp way:
>
> process : list-file-template filename
>
> Note the space between “process” and the remainder. It would be wrong
> to remove the space after “process”. That’s a pitfall stemming from a
> familiarity with YAML that I’d rather avoid. (That’s why I want to
> rename “process:” and “workflow:”.)
Does it make sense to expand "process: proc arg" as "process : proc arg"?
Well, disallow the colon ':' in all the name (symbol) and then expand.
Because this space is a drawback of Wisp, I mean at least to me.
Especially coming from Python where the standard is to have "def
proc(arg):" and not "def proc(arg) :".
> The only reason why I know how to use “:” is because I know that I want
> the remainder to be wrapped in parentheses… People who only know the
> sugary syntax would not have that knowledge and it would just seem like
> an arbitrary thing.
Yes exactly.
To place the Wisp sugary syntax, each time I am going back to Scheme,
think where are the opening/closing parenthesis and then adapt the
sugar.
> process list-file-template : filename
I would be tempted to write without the space.
process list-file-template: filename
> process list-file-template (filename)
I find this one the clearer.
All the best,
simon
- Re: Comments on process template syntax, (continued)
- Re: Comments on process template syntax, Ricardo Wurmus, 2020/02/03
- Re: Comments on process template syntax, Roel Janssen, 2020/02/03
- Re: Comments on process template syntax, Ricardo Wurmus, 2020/02/03
- Re: Comments on process template syntax, Ricardo Wurmus, 2020/02/04
- Re: Comments on process template syntax, Kyle Meyer, 2020/02/04
- Re: Comments on process template syntax, zimoun, 2020/02/05
- Re: Comments on process template syntax, Kyle Meyer, 2020/02/05
- Re: Comments on process template syntax, zimoun, 2020/02/05
- Re: Comments on process template syntax, Kyle Meyer, 2020/02/05
- Re: Comments on process template syntax, zimoun, 2020/02/05
- Re: Comments on process template syntax,
zimoun <=
- Re: Comments on process template syntax, Ricardo Wurmus, 2020/02/05
- Re: Comments on process template syntax, zimoun, 2020/02/05
- Re: Comments on process template syntax, Ricardo Wurmus, 2020/02/05
- Re: Comments on process template syntax, zimoun, 2020/02/06
Re: Comments on process template syntax, zimoun, 2020/02/05
Re: Comments on process template syntax, zimoun, 2020/02/05