4 ms·
I think you are missing the point of the statement. If one was designing a language meant to be developed in an IDE, you can hold various assumptions which woul
by deeviant 12y ago
I think you are missing the point of the statement. If one was designing a language meant to be developed in an IDE, you can hold various assumptions which would influence how syntax shapes up.
A trivial example which is not related to rust but I think serves as a decent example, you can assume the IDE will color/italicize/etc member variables to get rid of _var __var var__ nonsense. You can also use slightly less verbose terms even if they are less informative if you assume a tooltip with a concise and complete explanation pops up.
- eevee 12y agoI'm a little terrified by the prospect of a language designed to be incomprehensible without a stack of tools that will explain it to you.
- e12e 12y agoI'm not sure how interesting this topic really is. As an example, look at Smalltalk. Crazy easy syntax, and made to be used in an IDE that dwarf what most of us consider an IDE.