From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Emanuel Berg Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Instead of pcase Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 00:54:34 +0100 Message-ID: <87edgkaslh.fsf@dataswamp.org> References: <21eda04f-b974-0c56-ce6c-4fc0810e4e13@gutov.dev> <87edgkouoa.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="37359"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:VkTKXk4euR707p0RWLcyEdTLDIY= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Nov 21 04:22:42 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1r5HLV-0009WM-7K for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 21 Nov 2023 04:22:41 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r5HLF-0006MW-3p; Mon, 20 Nov 2023 22:22:25 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r5E6L-0006Al-4d for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Nov 2023 18:54:49 -0500 Original-Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r5E6G-00026H-0m for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Nov 2023 18:54:48 -0500 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1r5E6E-0006rM-3s for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Nov 2023 00:54:42 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Mail-Copies-To: never Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: -16 X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.7 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 20 Nov 2023 22:22:22 -0500 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:313086 Archived-At: Jose E. Marchesi wrote: >>> My organization largely comprises C programmers who use >>> Emacs for programming, as a means to an end rather than an >>> end in itself. Our two sites centrally provision their own >>> Emacs configurations to all users, which incorporates >>> a large corpus of code for editing and analyzing >>> C programs in accord with local practice. Naturally, the >>> existence of this corpus demands that programmers be >>> charged with its upkeep, and as no position is set aside >>> for such work, this responsibility devolves on individuals >>> almost at random. This is a representative microcosm of >>> the wider Emacs userbase, I think: for most are not >>> hobbyists, or even employed programmers for whom >>> programming is also an avocation, but men working for >>> salaries, with bills to pay and families to... you can >>> complete the rest of this trite description. And it is >>> they whom I canvassed. >> >> Polling professional C developers on whether they are >> comfortable with advanced syntax inspired by high-level >> languages like ML or Haskell is pretty much >> a self-fulfilling prophecy. >> >> Ask a company of OCaml developers (we have at least one >> representative of such among active contributors), or even >> a corpus of experienced JavaScript developers, the results >> will be different. > > Following your own reasoning, wouldn't it be also reasonable > to expect that the vast majority of Lisp developers won't be > comfortable with such an "advanced syntax", considering that > Lisp (unlike C) has basically no syntax? Maybe we should add some parenthesis to pcase, if that will make the Lisp programmers more comfortable using it? -- underground experts united https://dataswamp.org/~incal