News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:CamelCase vs. Underscores: Revisited by yakubin on Wednesday January 25, 2023 @08:30PM (#34526662)
> Lisp chooses to remove infix minus.

Infix has nothing to do with it. - refers to the subtraction function regardless of whether it is placed in prefix or infix position. Infix will trigger a type error, not a syntactic error — it will tell you that e.g. it cannot call a fixnum. Lisp quite ordinarily requires function names to be separated from their arguments by spaces, which is just a special case of the rule that atoms need to be separated by spaces. That’s all.

Re:CamelCase vs. Underscores: Revisited by lispm on Thursday January 26, 2023 @02:24AM (#34528708)
In many Lisps (+ + +) means this: call the function named + on the two values from the variables named +. The function is then a function object and the values of + can be anything they are currently set to.

Thus + serves more than one purpose: function or variable and both may be different values.

Thus the position actually matters.

What we have below the Lisp syntax are s-expressions: nested lists of symbols and other objects. In s-expressions, symbols need to be separated by whitespace, parentheses or possibly by some special character type (-> terminating character). Characters like +, -, /, *, _, ... are valid characters for any symbols.

Thus Lisp does not require functions to be separated by characters but symbols. That's a part of the reader mechanism for reading s-expressions (-> symbolic expression).

Re:CamelCase vs. Underscores: Revisited by yakubin on Thursday January 26, 2023 @04:27AM (#34529535)
Right, I was thinking about Lisp-1. Good call-out.
Re:CamelCase vs. Underscores: Revisited by gonzus on Thursday January 26, 2023 @05:49AM (#34530140)
... which is the one and only Lisp. Long live Scheme!