[E-Lang] Syntax Reductions: Consensus so far

zooko@zooko.com zooko@zooko.com
Mon, 05 Mar 2001 13:02:01 -0800


 MarcS wrote:

> If we come up with an entirely different word for the function keyword, I'm
> not even sure that that is a win, because people are going to pass
> "functions" around in live code as objects. There are even 2 examples in the
> book that do this (though I have tried to constrain this usage in the book
> :-)


Ppooko likes for syntax to represent the "primary" facts about the 
meaning.  To Ppooko, the primary meaning of a function is different from 
the primary of a class or object, but the same as the primary meaning of 
a method.  (This is because Ppooko has learned Python, in which functions
and methods look and act the same to normal programmers.)


Ppooko *likes* the idea that functions are objects, because everything 
should be an object, especially functions, but the syntax should show 
functions as being different from objects and similar to methods.


BTW, for those of you who are tired of Ppooko, he will soon retire, 
spoiled by having "Learned Too Much", and hopefully be replaced with a 
sacrificial Java programmer.


Regards,

Ppooko

P.S.  Obviously "primary" to Ppooko is completely different from 
"primary" to a language designer.