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

[Sandro Magi]

Kevin Reid wrote:
> I think what I would do to support human auditing is allow infix  
> operators, but prohibit precedence and associativity; that is,  
> parentheses must be used around any operand of an infix operator  
> which is itself an infix operation. This seems to me a simple and  
> strong solution; source is always understandable without context, and  
> yet infix syntax is not limited to the traditional arithmetic operators.

That's always been my opinion too. I can appreciate the argument for 
customizable precedence though.

If precedence is available, I would consider the use of an auditing 
tool. This tool would use the language's parser, preferably available as 
a library, to insert 'shadow brackets' so the user can see the explicit 
associations (similar to how editors now highlights blocks in most 
editors). This sounds like a useful mode for the source editor as well, 
and is a simple, strong solution for a language with precedence assignment.

> On the other hand, stick with s-expressions; elaborate syntax is a  
> tarpit for design.

As s-expressions are a tarpit for criticism. ;-)

Sandro