This is the mail archive of the
guile@sourceware.cygnus.com
mailing list for the Guile project.
Re: Syntatic sugar and identifier permissivity
At 23:07 04/04/2000 +0200, Mikael Djurfeldt wrote:
>Marius Vollmer <mvo@zagadka.ping.de> writes:
>> I don't like that a simple C statement like
>>
>> obj->x++;
>>
>> turns into
>>
>> (set! (gto-canvas-x obj) (1+ (gto-canvas-x obj)))
>
>Well, after using GOOPS in my projects since this summer, my
>experiences are rather good. :) I write
>
> (set! (x obj) (1+ (x obj)))
>
>and have not experienced difficulties from the fact that (x ...) may
>mean other slots in other objects.
After using Goops for a few months, I must say that I do not agree. This
is really too much typing for accessing a slot in an object. The point is
not (only) that it's too long to *type*, but that it takes too much time to
*read* it. In all languages I know (including human languages), the more
common words and sentences are the shortest, and syntactic sugar makes them
visually different, and it is a good thing. I really think that
obj->x++
is more readable than
(set! (x obj) (1+ (x obj)))
It really bothers me when I re-read the DOM code I'm trying (sometimes) to
write.
--
Thierry Bézecourt
thbz@worldnet.fr