News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:History of Lisp Parentheses (2019) by gsinclair on Wednesday February 01, 2023 @10:44PM (#34621763)
The convention is enforced in Clojure. [] for bindings, {} for maps.
Re:History of Lisp Parentheses (2019) by funcDropShadow on Thursday February 02, 2023 @03:15AM (#34623686)
It is not a convention in Clojure. (), [], {}, #{} represent different data structures.
Re:History of Lisp Parentheses (2019) by Sakos on Thursday February 02, 2023 @04:01AM (#34624005)
It's really just syntactic sugar, so I would agree with the statement that the convention is being enforced.
Re:History of Lisp Parentheses (2019) by funcDropShadow on Friday February 03, 2023 @10:46AM (#34642603)
You get different data structures. I.e. printing #{ 1 1 2 2 } prints #{ 1 2 } whereas [ 1 1 2 2 ] prints [ 1 1 2 2].
Re:History of Lisp Parentheses (2019) by tmtvl on Thursday February 02, 2023 @08:18AM (#34626108)
Not exactly, it uses square brackets for vectors sometimes and curly brackets for maps sometimes, yet other times it uses square brackets for maps:

  (let [a 1 b 2] (+ a b))
Instead of:

  (let {a 1 b 2} (+ a b))
(I think my map notation may be wrong, I always just bounce off Clojure so I'm bound to make mistakes).