Re: Compress a sequence of ends

["Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@...>]

Dimiter 'malkia' Stanev <malkia@gmail.com> writes:

>> I've got an idea.  Let's use a single character, instead of a keyword
>> here.
>>
>> (for k=1, 10 do
>>   (for j=1, 10 do
>>    (for i=1, 10 do
>>      f(i, j, k)
>>      )))
>
> Or
>
> (for k=1, 10 do
>   (for j=1, 10 do
>    (for i=1, 10 do
>      f(i, j, k)]

No.  The problem is that the algorithm to balance parentheses becomes
too complex.  With normal parentheses, any editor can implement the
simple algorithm required to check parentheses, and even to provide
higher level editing commands, like paredit does in emacs.


-- 
__Pascal Bourguignon__                     http://www.informatimago.com/
A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.