Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!percy!data!kend
From: kend@data.UUCP (Ken Dickey)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: scheme [Re: What does an anti-perl look like]
Message-ID: <505@data.UUCP>
Date: 13 Jun 91 20:44:41 GMT
References: <1991Jun05.013632.3198@convex.com> <1991Jun05.220157.13416@convex.com> <OZ.91Jun12001150@ursa.ccs.yorku.ca>
Organization: Microcosm, Beaverton, OR
Lines: 13

>byron@donald.tamu.edu (Byron Rakitzis) writes:

>> 3) I want the syntax of the language to be elegant. This sounds like a tall
>> order, but what I'm doing is ruling out languages like Scheme; I just cannot
>> deal with the Lots of Irrelevant and Stupid Parentheses.

You probably don't use C's ugly curly braces, parenthesis, or square
brackets (why so many types of parenthesis?).  Aside from being
elegant--which it is--, Scheme's syntax is trivial.  I *never* have to
look at a language manual to use Scheme.  I *always* have to look at
manuals for non-lisp-family languages.  Syntax should be trivial!

-Ken Dickey				kend@data.uucp