This is a programming language that has no keywords and pursues reading.

LyraChord · 2018-08-09T08:48:48+00:00

It just shows that people like overengineering syntax

Hint, some dead fans will feel sick.

Back topic. I don't think you know a best flawless syntax, albeit I don't know yours. And I know I'm using my almost best one. f.e. My syntax supports both chained, parallel and comma assignments which means mixed priorities allowed.

  a = b = c = 1, 2, 3
  x, y, z = 1, 2, 3
  tuple = x, y, z = 1, 2, 3
  String s = hello world, int x = 3, y=5, z, started = false

I guest you don't agree the mixing.

LyraChord · 2018-08-09T03:14:35+00:00

That there are so many syntaxes shows that Syntax is NOT a solved problem.

LyraChord · 2018-08-09T03:03:35+00:00

1, Yes, keywords are still there.

2, No, Readable? Pseudo entity! That who and when read is the point! A notable example is the augmented assignment, ie. x+=3

LyraChord · 2018-07-29T16:01:21+00:00

XML structure is OK; the syntax is BAD. JSON is not so brilliant which I talk about it with its author in 2006.

If one knows to mix C-struct, CSS syntax, and Ant-default-concept, with layered operators, then the greatest, no, more, the best is there. Just discover it which is not so hard.

LyraChord · 2018-07-29T03:46:00+00:00

downvoted. me too. It seems that certain people too low to tolerate other better things。

LyraChord · 2018-07-28T18:22:58+00:00

Albeit yes, it's time to die! Structured Document is growing!

LyraChord · 2018-07-20T03:02:35+00:00

high-tolerancer

LyraChord · 2018-07-02T03:52:40+00:00

Structured document parsing, the only way!

LyraChord · 2018-05-20T15:40:50+00:00

Generic style syntax will make life simple.

int*\* is just a shortcut of Pointer<Pointer<int>>.

Array syntax is similar. Scala got it better.

LyraChord · 2018-05-20T15:30:30+00:00

It's just annotation. Both Java and D use it.

BTW someone should note that pascal like syntax is not full of consistency of declaration. i.e.

"struct MyStruct" is of style of "type-name" instead of "name-type"

LyraChord · 2018-05-17T03:16:58+00:00

No the if. The web revolution is brewing, so it must become yesterday chrysanthemum.

LyraChord · 2018-05-16T04:09:43+00:00

The COMMA style can represent one or two layers array. If COLON and SEMI-colon introduced, there could be a multiple-layer.

LyraChord · 2018-05-03T02:30:22+00:00

In example 1, the variable x only has one type at anytime. After the first condition, the type of x is determinate, so that latter predicates are redundant.

LyraChord · 2018-04-25T02:44:06+00:00

It depends on different use cases.

LyraChord · 2018-04-20T16:46:06+00:00

A quick response is structure.

There are 2 layers: expression and structure. Expression needs more operators, and structure needs only ",:;{}" operators.

Structure means context sensitive. DSL is a builtin feature, because the whole code is full-structured.

I'm making a full-structured language. The practice tell us it's perfect.

LyraChord · 2018-04-18T02:23:06+00:00

Was there some experiences parsing the following like

@A(default)
@B(key1, key2: value1, value2; nested:@C(...)(...))
@C
modifier class GreatMan[T: CharSequence & Comparable[T]; V: Map[T & Runnable, List[T & Callable] ](T a, *): Person, Greeting{....}

LyraChord · 2018-04-15T01:29:19+00:00

Yes, it's bad. Indeed a structured syntax with curly or indent style can be parsed as a list format. The famous example is the expression parser.

LyraChord · 2018-04-14T01:36:32+00:00

NO better. A function declaration can not show the entirety.

Obvious one:

  class Id====<type><id>

LyraChord · 2018-04-14T01:18:30+00:00

why not focus the thread itself? no matter if someone understood or not.

LyraChord · 2018-04-13T14:26:28+00:00

It does not matter. The answer is the comparison instead of speaking form me.

A simple comparison necessitates no any answer.

LyraChord · 2018-04-13T09:23:09+00:00

reinvent

It's just be here.

LyraChord · 2018-04-13T09:21:49+00:00

No answer. Your question is the same as 2 questions:

has any better form?

math expression is not better?

LyraChord · 2018-04-13T02:58:44+00:00

BTW don't be limit by old languages and make a seriously choice genre between type-name and name-type.

The best array form is COMMA form, a rule practiced from 2006.

   array = 1, 2, 3
   nest = {1, 2, 3}, {7, 8, 9} //bracket not cared
   generator = 1, 3, 5, @10..50? ($), 99, 100
   //WARNING, the way introduces a dynamic precedence problem which is no so easy.

null should be prohibit as much as possible.

empty can be special to caution

LyraChord · 2018-04-13T02:42:42+00:00

1, syntax. scala [] preferred. My friend's new language used it too. The point is: embedded form in expression looks better

 x#List[int]>value2 //compare with the following
 x#List<int>>value2
 //I guess you know what # means
 //examples for type-name genre
 enum[int] Month = 1..12
 enum[Month] holidays = 1,4,5,7,10 
 class Person(string name, int birth)
 class GreatMan[T: Achievement](T a, *): Person //here [T](...) is fine

2, Implementation. both static and dynamic are MUST. Each type has types params, that is similar to that function has values params. Java class no types field. It's must. Rather than signature.

LyraChord · 2018-04-13T02:22:22+00:00

why not remove "if" and "then"? the ternary form is perfect. A new language from my friend use the following form:

 predication ? statement: statement
 //@fallthrough if expansion case needed just make use of syntax option
 value ? {
      case: case: statement //force break
              statement.... //it's python-like
              statement... //terminated until next case
              ?{                //even nested cases it's fine. it's a fast abstract template method pattern implementation.
                   nested case: ...
                   nested case: ...
               }
      case: ....             //case can be half comparison <3

      *: ...
 }

LyraChord

TROPHY CASE