Re: Improving aesthetics & readability of backquote

[Paul W. Rankin]

On Mon, May 20 2019, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> > Add to this the \` is just an alias for backquote, which 
> > doesn't 
> > imply any meaning except as relation to itself. Its meaning 
> > cannot 
> > be inferred through the code alone.
>
> Sorry, I can't make anything out of that paragraph.  What 
> meaning?  What
> relation to what?  Which code alone?

The \` symbol is an alias to backquote, and the word "backquote" 
only describes the symbol, i.e. circular semantics.

> > I suggest that we could introduce some aliases and augment the 
> > reader constucts a little to make them more aesthetically 
> > pleasing 
> > and more readable.
>
> I don't agree with you that (quote foo) is more readable than 
> 'foo.  I
> would find (quote foo) tiring to write, and (more importantly) 
> tiring to
> read.  I believe very early lisps were lacking the ' operator.
> (quoteval foo) would be even worse for me.

I'm using "readability" in the sense of reader comprehension, not 
eyestrain.

> > If it remains unclear, my suggestion is not to supplant the 
> > original syntax; I position this suggestion in a similar vein 
> > as 
> > the rx library.
>
> But code has to be maintained, and everybody would have to know 
> the
> meaning of these new aliases, and be practiced with them, to be 
> able to
> maintain code using them.

Hence the choice of clear, easily understandable aliases.

> I'm afraid I'm against such changes.

I'm proposing an addition, not changes. See the aforementioned rx 
library; its relationship to regular expression in Emacs Lisp 
should be instructive.

--
https://www.paulwrankin.com