[bitc-dev] Issues for s-block surface syntax

[Sandro Magi]

Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-01-23 at 20:48 +0000, Sam Mason wrote:
>> Is this a problem because symbols are more opaque than names?
> 
> Not really. It's a problem because you can't even know how the *parse*
> will behave without full knowledge of every gritty little symbol that
> some genious library builder felt compelled to help you by introducing.
> It's an enormous (human) impediment to understanding what is going on.

And yet, so is the use of deeply nested bracketing to implement a 
sequence of operations. For instance, try working with monads without 
the do-notation.

Judicious use of operators with customizable precedence can greatly 
*improve* the clarity of code, as much as it can harm it.

As for code analysis, I consider that a standard library deficiency. Why 
isn't the language's parser available in its own standard library?

Sandro