A different take on S-expressions

Re:A different take on S-expressions by velcrovan on Wednesday June 18, 2025 @02:18PM (#44312113)

It gets worse/better. Since Racket allows you to hook your own reader in front of (or in place of) the default reader, you can have things like 2D syntax:

    #lang 2d racket
    (require 2d/match)
     
    (define (subtype? a b)
      #2dmatch
      ╔══════════╦══════════╦═══════╦══════════╗
      ║   a  b   ║ 'Integer ║ 'Real ║ 'Complex ║
      ╠══════════╬══════════╩═══════╩══════════╣
      ║ 'Integer ║             #t              ║
      ╠══════════╬══════════╗                  ║
      ║ 'Real    ║          ║                  ║
      ╠══════════╣          ╚═══════╗          ║
      ║ 'Complex ║        #f        ║          ║
      ╚══════════╩══════════════════╩══════════╝)

https://docs.racket-lang.org/2d/index.html

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A different take on S-expressions by perrygeo on Wednesday June 18, 2025 @09:58PM (#44314788)

That's amazing and terrible at the same time. I love it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A different take on S-expressions by phoe-krk on Thursday June 19, 2025 @02:17AM (#44315945)

Truth be told, you can intercept the reader in Common Lisp, too, and here it actually makes some sense since the 2D value is immediately visually grokkable as an ASCII-art table. The proposed 2D sexpr notation does not have this.

[ Parent | on HN ]