🚀 go-pugleaf

Stephen P Spackman:
   I'm NOT suggesting having no fixed syntax (there are very GOOD
   reasons not to want that, including implementability and
   readability). Just that if I want to write a function called
           "if ... represents ... then ... end"
   the fact that there is one called
           "if ... then ... else ... end"
   in the language core shouldn't stop me. Surely you see the
   difference?

What is it, here, which is fixed?

   An added benefit of this approach is that, given a syntax that is
   INDEPENDENT of the actual identifiers, you don't even have to know
   the full set of CORE language facilities to start reading code -
   the opposite situation from PL/1 !

I've never programmed in PL/1.  But I'm not sure what you're saying.
For instance, in your above example, is the syntax of the word
'represents' independent of the identifier 'represents'?  If so, how
does this make it easier to read the code?  If not, could you give an
example of what you're saying?

   You're saying "if your types are other than characters and floats,
   go elsewhere; this language is not for you". How silly!

I'm saying nothing of the sort.

-- 
Raul Deluth Miller-Rockwell                   <rockwell@socrates.umd.edu>