That's an interesting point. Is the logic something like: expr languages need to delimit exprs, the only reasonable way to delimit exprs is surround with brackets, but for consistency you should just have that everywhere, so that implies sexps?
Conversation
That is .. pretty much my conclusion, yes. Though if you want to avoid wearing our your shift key, maybe [square brackets]? :)
2
3
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
(Yeah I know, this is one of those things I have to remind myself of every time I get half-way into making something that leans on square brackets too heavily, it's super sad because they're obviously the best brackets.)
1
1
3
Can just make them interchangeable, at the expense of some precious ASCII real estate
3
1
Spoken like a true concatenative minimalist. So unconcerned with the precious few plausible paired tokens, you're wiling to make two of them _synonyms_. How delightful / horrible!
1
7
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
In roughly ascending order of accursedness:
( )
[ ]
{ }
< >
/ \
: ;
` '
`` "
d b
q p
^ v
2
3
if fi and case esac ftw
2
5
That cracked me up the first time I saw it