Subject: Re: [Boost-docs] The beauty of LATEX
From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-10-23 01:24:30
On 10/23/2011 7:49 AM, Joel de Guzman wrote:
> On 10/23/2011 4:15 AM, Dave Abrahams wrote:
>> Especially if you're inspired by S-expressions, I can't imagine any good
>> excuse to invent a new syntax when lisp already has a syntax for this
>> sort of thing. If we need to use square brackets instead of round ones
>> for legacy (or other) reasons, that's fine, but I don't at all see why
>> it makes sense to choose a syntax where of all things there's no outer
>> set of parens around the entire
>> function/macro/template/whatever-you-call-this-thing. Why not do this:
>>
>> [def foo[a] [a]]
>
> You are right Dave. I totally mixed it up! My concern was legacy
> Qbk code. I wanted something that can be applied to legacy code
> using simple grep. But I fumbled and mixed it up. I see that
> the old syntax has the syntax you wrote! I'll fix it.
Following scheme/lisp more closely, that should be:
[def [foo a] [a]]
(Fine. That should still be grep-able).
Now we have it very close to scheme including the dot notation
for variable args. E.g.
[decl [table title . rows]]
and lambda. E.g.:
[lambda [x] [dup [x]]]
(http://pastebin.com/2vQmGyHF)
I think were close to a nice scheme-ish syntax while still being
friendly to migration of legacy quickbook code.
Regards,
-- Joel de Guzman http://www.boostpro.com http://boost-spirit.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : 2017-11-11 08:50:41 UTC