3 ms·
The language does make a strong case for "code is read more than it is written", so it does make it easier/cleaner to quickly see the keywords, etc. However, 2
by phantom_oracle 10y ago
The language does make a strong case for "code is read more than it is written", so it does make it easier/cleaner to quickly see the keywords, etc.
However, 2 improvements that could be made are:
1) being able to write the code as normal (if instead of IF, else instead of ELSE) and then using something like:
zu.fmt
To format the code (best of both worlds?)
2) Dropping the ending-brace. It will just lead to many errors that could otherwise be avoided
---
Also, if you are interested in a similar language, maybe Nim might be worth a look:
http://nim-lang.org/ http://nim-lang.org/
- qwertyuiop924 10y agoNim... urgh. It's a bit quirky, bit kind of nice. The really ugly bit is the macro system: Nim macros are awful.
- dom96 10y ago> The really ugly bit is the macro system: Nim macros are awful. If I had a penny for every time I see you say that on HN... :) In any case, I disagree with you. Nim macros are really easy to work with, the AST construction is a bit verbose but that can be easily remedied by writing functions which make the construction easier.
- qwertyuiop924 10y agoI do say it a lot. But it is true. >that can be easily remedied by writing functions which make the construction easier. That can only really go so far...
- nimmer 10y agoYou keep repeating that without describing how in comparison to other languages.
- qwertyuiop924 10y agoActually, I've gone into quite a bit of depth about how it fares in comparison to other languages. :-) You can go look up the comments, if you like. I can't do another writeup on it at the moment, sorry to say.
- otabdeveloper 10y ago> "code is read more than it is written" Is that really true? An amazing amount of absolutely mission-critical infrastructure runs on code that was written once and probably never even code-reviewed.