4 ms·
Looks cool but why the λ and ƒ? That's not practical for anyone. I guess it's a cool novelty for functional types but it will confuse anyone who sees BODOL in
by habosa 14y ago
Looks cool but why the λ and ƒ? That's not practical for anyone. I guess it's a cool novelty for functional types but it will confuse anyone who sees BODOL in the wild.
I know it's a nitpick, but it seems strange to include characters that aren't on the keyboard as part of the default syntax.
- phowat 14y agoI thought the same at first. But as I was checking out the language, I simply created keybindings in my .vimrc to both characters. Now if I press ALT+f, I get the ƒ character. Less key presses than any other function definition keyword from any language I ever used. And I know I could have done the same thing for the other languages, but the fact is that I never did.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- hga 14y agoErrm, from the Readme: "What's with those non-ASCII characters? If you're discouraged by the curious absence of λ and ƒ on your keyboard, you can substitute Clojure's fn and defn or Common Lisp's lambda and defun respectively." ADDED: Lambda and the define function sugar are so fundamental to Lisps and commonly used that I see little harm in allowing substitution with single special characters.
- vorg 14y ago> Looks cool but why the λ and ƒ? That's not practical for anyone. > it seems strange to include characters that aren't on the keyboard as part of the default syntax You say "not practical for anyone" and "seems strange", but maybe restricting a computer language to ASCII only is stange. With Pinyin IME's (e.g. Google's or Baidu's) people can easily and quickly enter thousands of characters not on the keyboard. It would be easy to someone to develop an IME to enable symbols to similarly be entered - (I mean a non-specific-IDE-based one, i.e. without having to go thru Eclipse or Emacs).