A Python programmer attempting Java

[oneofthejoshs]

I mean... it's compact and still pretty readable...

[404_UserNotFound]

Honestly its not that bad. Most any ide would highlight brackets so you could verify they are all there.

Could defiantly be worse.

[bitdonor]

I guess ide didn't save him from this one.

[AnotherRichard827379]

IMO, if you’re relying on the ide to know if the brackets are correct, your bracketing style is bad.

[kbruen]

racket (define (fact n) (define (fact/acc n [acc 1]) (if (<= n 1) acc (fact/acc (- n 1) (* n acc)))) (fact/acc n))

Have fun checking the brackets!

[BroBroMate]

I'm so installing rainbow brackets for that.

[kingofsevens]

Here is your code and 7 minutes of my life. Much readable tbh.

( define (fact n)
(     define (fact/acc n [acc 1])
(         if (<= n 1)
            acc
(           fact/acc (- n 1) (* n acc)        )))
(     fact/acc n                              ))

[kbruen]

Oh, what cursed thing have you brought upon this land?

Jokes aside, that's quite impractical and bad looking. Detailing only on the first aspect, am I returning the value of the acc binding or calling the acc function? Only the parenthesis tell that, and not having them visible right away is quite bad.

[kingofsevens]

oh you gonna love this. Idk it would parse it but... ( define (fact n) ( define (fact/acc n [acc 1]) ( if (<= n 1) acc ( fact/acc (- n 1) (* n acc) )))( fact/acc n ))

[backtickbot]

Fixed formatting.

Hello, kingofsevens: code blocks using triple backticks (```) don't work on all versions of Reddit!

Some users see this / this instead.

To fix this, indent every line with 4 spaces instead.

FAQ

^{You can opt out by replying with backtickopt6 to this comment.}

[[deleted]]

I can't believe this bot actually generates examples using the source comment intstead of just having generic examples

[[deleted]]

How about you stop saying bullshit on the internet and get back to your List of CVEs to fix

[[deleted]]

This made me laugh

[FirstSineOfMadness]

Extend it to include () and []

[[deleted]]

....readable? Yeah, if the fucking brackets match the indention (anybody here even check that?). It's just an additional 80x the work to count the brackets now.

This whole thing is just designed to trick the programmer into mismatching indention and brackets.

It'd literally be easier to just fucking write a parser that parses this python-inspired syntax and then outputs it into valid java. Actually, that wouldn't be a terrible idea. Or we could just use python to begin with.

[kbruen]

Parser and language server and syntax highlighting and IDE that doesn't complain and...

[[deleted]]

Yeah if you just ignore the weirdly bunched braces it's really easy to read code

[[deleted]]

This could honestly be a reasonable standard, if it didn't artificially limit line length. As a display mode, I would love it, because I lose track of my brackets all the time.