this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2025
76 points (97.5% liked)
Programming
22516 readers
143 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't have proper experience with it, I just built a small prototype with it back in 2021, to evaluate it for a project. But yeah, apparently these were my notes:
Apparently, past-me wasn't as big on the syntax. ๐
But I can see why, because this is the code I wrote back then, apparently (I wanted to create a OS configuration framework ร la Puppet, Ansible etc.):
main.nim:
host.nim:
role.nim:
Certainly some syntax elements in there where I have not even the faintest guess anymore what they would do...
You were right. Using whitespace for code blocks is literally the worst option.
I dunno I would say Lisp syntax is probably the worst option. Or APL style.
Lisp syntax would not even necessarily be that bad if in practice people did not lump all of the closing parentheses in a place where it is really hard to visually match them with their respective opening parentheses so that it is hard to immediately see what is going on. (I have been told that the trick is to read the whitespace instead of the parentheses, but that does not actually help because the whitespace is not significant in Lisp!)
Yeah I agree. Presumably they don't do that though because you'd end up with pages of nothing but
)
.I never understood why they don't add just a little syntactic sugar. You don't need much to take it from a mess of brackets to something comprehensible.
It was in the original design, but not the first implementation. By the time someone got around to it, people where used to S-expressions.
You make a strong argument! ๐