[bitc-dev] Surface Syntax (again)

Levi Greenspan greenspan.levi at googlemail.com
Wed Feb 25 17:05:58 EST 2009


On Wed, 2009-02-25 at 11:02 -0500, Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote:
> You all know that I've done some preliminary work toward a post-sexpr
> surface syntax. Most of it looks straightforward. 

Would it be possible to elaborate a bit on how this new surface syntax
would look like? From [1] I would expect it to be similar to the
C-family of languages, and from [2] that it would not be ML-like. As a
personal preference I very much prefer ML-like syntax (F#, SML, OCaml)
over C-style syntax. So I would be interested to know the arguments that
make you prefer the C style. Also I think surface syntax matters, so I
would welcome a more detailed discussion about it. Now seems to be the
right time, or not?

Many thanks,
Levi

--------------------
[1] http://www.coyotos.org/pipermail/bitc-dev/2006-August/000771.html
[2] http://www.bitc-lang.org/docs/bitc/bitc-origins.html




More information about the bitc-dev mailing list