Arc Forumnew | comments | leaders | submitlogin
1 point by dreish 5831 days ago | link | parent

Thanks for the tips.

I considered <- (along with a lot of other things), but rejected it because the left-associativity of it seemed counter-intuitive, it didn't stand out as much as slashes, and I want it to stand out because it's inconsistent with symbol syntax, it's confusing with -> which conventionally means type-conversion (and which doesn't break up symbols), and it's three times as much effort to type as /.

Slashes are fairly common in symbols, but not at the beginning (except for / itself), so it's unambiguously parseable, though maybe it won't work with this system, now that I think about it. I don't see how to prevent embedded slashes from meaning anything special without the first slash. I.e., I want foo/bar/nitz to be one symbol, but /foo/bar/nitz to be a symbol and two msg calls. Maybe that's too hairy, but I'd hate to break things like w/uniq.

I guess the general solution to any syntax that is confusing to people is a good syntax-highlighting editor.



3 points by almkglor 5831 days ago | link

Well, for that matter having (foo msg) mean "send msg to foo" would be much shorter, and also shows that Scheme was originally a synchronous message-passing language anyway.

-----

1 point by dreish 5831 days ago | link

Yeesh, why didn't I think of that?

That seems clearly to be the best way to do it. Thanks again.

-----