Thank you for the feedback and for fixing 'join! ^_^
> Also, note that if you're going to define your own version of falsity (no()), then the JavaScript && and || aren't necessarily going to play along with that. They'll treat "" as false, for instance.
Glad you pointed this out, may save me some debugging time. :)
Speaking of creating new structures vs. using built-in ones, I have considered switching to fake conses. That is, instead of there being a separate cons object as there is now, cons, car, cdr etc. would be array manipulations that make JavaScript arrays act just (or almost) like Arc lists. Do you have an opinion on this?
Re: 'if, the current version might seem more intuitive to a JavaScripter, but your approach may be more consistent with the way I'm expanding 'do. And then there's your point, that the latter has a close 1-to-1 correspondence of expressions with Arc while the former breaks up an expression into several statements. (Is this what you meant, or have I misunderstood?)
> As far as nested strings go, could you elaborate on that?
In the first Arc Challenge attempt I posted is the line,
(+ |\'you said: \'| foo.value)))))
The |\'you said: \'| from that is manual string escaping I'm doing because 'js naively compiles "you said: " to 'you said: ' without considering the need for backslashes. I think it's important to be able to have JavaScript within HTML within JavaScript within HTML within ... within JavaScript, and I'm not sure it's a particularly difficult string escaping problem - I just haven't gotten it working yet.
...array manipulations that make JavaScript arrays act just (or almost) like Arc lists. Do you have an opinion on this?
Well, to have cons produce an JavaScript array would be a bit odd. What happens to improper lists? (Well, Arc chokes on improper lists all the time, so maybe it doesn't matter. :-p )
I think it could be a good long-term idea to support both JavaScript arrays and the Arc cons type you already have. Functions like 'all, 'map, and 'join could work for both kinds of lists, and this way people wouldn't necessarily have to change the way they're using conses, and they could work closer to the metal (or whatever JS is ^_^ ) when that was more useful.
...the latter has a close 1-to-1 correspondence of expressions with Arc while the former breaks up an expression into several statements. (Is this what you meant, or have I misunderstood?)
I'm mostly just concerned that you should be able to say things like (let x (if (< foo 2) 0 foo) (* x x)). If (if ...) translates to a statement, that won't work.
|\'you said: \'|
Oh, I see now.
Yeah, the string escaping shouldn't be that difficult. I suppose the trickiest part about string escaping is remembering to do it. ^_^
