3 ms·
I run emacs, so I messed around with paredit and friends. I can understand your pov as a professional coder, doing enough coding that you can really master the
by rscho 2y ago
I run emacs, so I messed around with paredit and friends.
I can understand your pov as a professional coder, doing enough coding that you can really master the syntax of your language of choice. I code occasionally for scientific research, and the less syntax I have to remember, the better. Little syntactic constraint in combination with structural editing really is a killer feature in my context.
- justinpombrio 2y agoparedit is what I think of as a half-structural editor. It gives you some structural shortcuts, but the cursor is still on a character instead of on a node, IIRC. My bet (that I've spent a lot of time building an editor for) is that the big gains will come when the cursor is never on text, always on an AST node. > the less syntax I have to remember, the better Part of my point is that parenthetical languages don't actually have that much less syntax. You have to remember one of these two syntaxes: let x = 1; let y = 2; do_stuff (let ((x 1) (y 2)) do_stuff) Now you say that there's a lot more possible variation in the first case; it could be: let x = 1; # Rust var x = 1; # JS x=1 # bash And I point out that there's a lot of possible variation in the second case too: (define x 1) (define x 2) do_stuff (let (x 1) (y 2) do_stuff) (let x 1 (let y 2 do_stuff)) There is less syntax with parens. But it's not zero syntax, and you still need to memorize it.