Recent changes to Join

Join modified by David A. Wheeler

David A. Wheeler — Tue, 09 Dec 2014 20:01:37 -0000

--- v31
+++ v32
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-Please join us!! We are refining the specifications, implementing them, and experimenting with them.  Now is the time to influence the result!
+Please join us!! We want to make Lisp-based languages easier to use.

 Simply join the [readable-discuss mailing list](https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/readable-discuss) if you want to join us.   You can get up-to-speed via the archives; the mailing list is archived by SourceForge, [mail-archive](http://www.mail-archive.com/readable-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net/), and [Gmane](http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.readable-lisp).  You might find the following pages helpful:

Join modified by David A. Wheeler

David A. Wheeler — Sun, 02 Nov 2014 20:37:53 -0000

--- v30
+++ v31
@@ -16,7 +16,9 @@

 We want the code to be portable.  [It's hard to write portable Scheme code](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11062320/writing-portable-scheme-code-is-anything-standard-beyond-r5rs-itself).  Generally, we stick with R5RS, since [most Scheme implementations are not going to implement R6RS](http://lists.r6rs.org/pipermail/r6rs-discuss/2007-October/003351.html).  That can be challenging, e.g., R5RS (and before) don't have a module system, nor a simple exception-raising system.  R7RS looks very promising, but it's not clear how well it will be accepted.

-[http://ceaude.twoticketsplease.de/js-lisps.html Here is a list of Javascript Lisp implementations] - we might get these notations into some of them, such as SLip.
+[Here is a list of Javascript Lisp implementations](http://ceaude.twoticketsplease.de/js-lisps.html) - we might get these notations into some of them, such as SLip.
+
+It's clear that most people realize that LISP's poor syntax is a real problem for use, because people keep working on trying to solve it.  A survey of approaches, which mentions "readable", is at [LISP Sans Parenthesis, 1958 to 2013, a Survey](http://xahlee.info/comp/lisp_sans_sexp.html).

 Obsolete materials are in [SRFI-Curly-issues], [SRFI-Curly], [SRFI-Neoteric], and [R7RS].  You can also see old modifications:

Join modified by David A. Wheeler

David A. Wheeler — Sat, 01 Nov 2014 17:44:53 -0000

--- v29
+++ v30
@@ -16,6 +16,8 @@

 We want the code to be portable.  [It's hard to write portable Scheme code](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11062320/writing-portable-scheme-code-is-anything-standard-beyond-r5rs-itself).  Generally, we stick with R5RS, since [most Scheme implementations are not going to implement R6RS](http://lists.r6rs.org/pipermail/r6rs-discuss/2007-October/003351.html).  That can be challenging, e.g., R5RS (and before) don't have a module system, nor a simple exception-raising system.  R7RS looks very promising, but it's not clear how well it will be accepted.

+[http://ceaude.twoticketsplease.de/js-lisps.html Here is a list of Javascript Lisp implementations] - we might get these notations into some of them, such as SLip.
+
 Obsolete materials are in [SRFI-Curly-issues], [SRFI-Curly], [SRFI-Neoteric], and [R7RS].  You can also see old modifications:

 * [Parser-tools] - discussion of various tools that might help parsing, primarily LL-based tools

Join modified by David A. Wheeler

David A. Wheeler — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 21:04:08 -0000

--- v28
+++ v29
@@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
 * [Editor] - How to create an editor mode, esp. for sweet-expressions
 * [TODO] - things that need doing
 * [Precedence] - Curly-infix does not have precedence, by intent.  If you *must* have precedence, here's an approach
+* [Clojure] - Clojure-specific comments.
 * [Humor] - Our community has a lighter side, too.

 We love code contributions!  Code is maintained in our [git repository](https://sourceforge.net/p/readable/code/); see [Workflow] for how we manage the code branches.  The easy way to start contributing code is to select the "develop" branch (not the "master" branch) and fork it; when you're done, submit a push request.

Join modified by David A. Wheeler

David A. Wheeler — Tue, 15 Oct 2013 00:10:03 -0000

--- v27
+++ v28
@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@

 Of course, you really need to read the [Solution] and [Tutorial] first to usefully discuss notation issues.  If you want to discuss changes to the notation, you really need to read the [Rationale] first.

-We want the code to be portable.  [It's hard to write portable Scheme code](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11062320/writing-portable-scheme-code-is-anything-standard-beyond-r5rs-itself).  Generally, we stick with R5RS, since [most Scheme implementations are not going to implement R6RS](http://lists.r6rs.org/pipermail/r6rs-discuss/2007-October/003351.html).  That can be challenging, e.g., R5RS (and before) don't have a module system, nor a simple exception-raising system.  R7RS looks very promising, but it's not even out yet.
+We want the code to be portable.  [It's hard to write portable Scheme code](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11062320/writing-portable-scheme-code-is-anything-standard-beyond-r5rs-itself).  Generally, we stick with R5RS, since [most Scheme implementations are not going to implement R6RS](http://lists.r6rs.org/pipermail/r6rs-discuss/2007-October/003351.html).  That can be challenging, e.g., R5RS (and before) don't have a module system, nor a simple exception-raising system.  R7RS looks very promising, but it's not clear how well it will be accepted.

 Obsolete materials are in [SRFI-Curly-issues], [SRFI-Curly], [SRFI-Neoteric], and [R7RS].  You can also see old modifications:

Join modified by David A. Wheeler

David A. Wheeler — Sun, 25 Aug 2013 16:51:05 -0000

--- v26
+++ v27
@@ -9,10 +9,9 @@
 * [Precedence] - Curly-infix does not have precedence, by intent.  If you *must* have precedence, here's an approach
 * [Humor] - Our community has a lighter side, too.

+We love code contributions!  Code is maintained in our [git repository](https://sourceforge.net/p/readable/code/); see [Workflow] for how we manage the code branches.  The easy way to start contributing code is to select the "develop" branch (not the "master" branch) and fork it; when you're done, submit a push request.
+
 Of course, you really need to read the [Solution] and [Tutorial] first to usefully discuss notation issues.  If you want to discuss changes to the notation, you really need to read the [Rationale] first.
-
-
-We love code contributions!  Code is maintained in our [git repository](https://sourceforge.net/p/readable/code/); see [Workflow] for how we manage the code branches.

 We want the code to be portable.  [It's hard to write portable Scheme code](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11062320/writing-portable-scheme-code-is-anything-standard-beyond-r5rs-itself).  Generally, we stick with R5RS, since [most Scheme implementations are not going to implement R6RS](http://lists.r6rs.org/pipermail/r6rs-discuss/2007-October/003351.html).  That can be challenging, e.g., R5RS (and before) don't have a module system, nor a simple exception-raising system.  R7RS looks very promising, but it's not even out yet.

Join modified by David A. Wheeler

David A. Wheeler — Sun, 11 Aug 2013 22:38:01 -0000

--- v25
+++ v26
@@ -4,9 +4,9 @@

 * [Names] - names and nomenclature
 * [Website] - discussion on how to improve this website
+* [Editor] - How to create an editor mode, esp. for sweet-expressions
 * [TODO] - things that need doing
 * [Precedence] - Curly-infix does not have precedence, by intent.  If you *must* have precedence, here's an approach
-* [Parser-tools] - discussion of various tools that might help parsing, primarily LL-based tools
 * [Humor] - Our community has a lighter side, too.

 Of course, you really need to read the [Solution] and [Tutorial] first to usefully discuss notation issues.  If you want to discuss changes to the notation, you really need to read the [Rationale] first.
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@

 Obsolete materials are in [SRFI-Curly-issues], [SRFI-Curly], [SRFI-Neoteric], and [R7RS].  You can also see old modifications:

+* [Parser-tools] - discussion of various tools that might help parsing, primarily LL-based tools
 * [Modifications-0.3] - Items that were discussed and resolved to create specification version 0.3.
 * [Modifications-0.4] - Items that were discussed and resolved to create specification version 0.4.
 * [Modifications-0.5] - Items that were discussed and resolved to create specification version 0.5.

Join modified by David A. Wheeler

David A. Wheeler — Sun, 11 Aug 2013 22:32:30 -0000

--- v24
+++ v25
@@ -5,23 +5,24 @@
 * [Names] - names and nomenclature
 * [Website] - discussion on how to improve this website
 * [TODO] - things that need doing
-* [Modifications-0.3] - Items that were discussed and resolved to create specification version 0.3.
-* [Modifications-0.4] - Items that were discussed and resolved to create specification version 0.4.
-* [Modifications-0.5] - Items that were discussed and resolved to create specification version 0.5.
-* [Modifications-0.6] - Items that were discussed and resolved to create specification version 0.6 (all due to SRFI-105)
-* [Modifications-0.7] - Items whose discussion is ongoing.
 * [Precedence] - Curly-infix does not have precedence, by intent.  If you *must* have precedence, here's an approach
 * [Parser-tools] - discussion of various tools that might help parsing, primarily LL-based tools
 * [Humor] - Our community has a lighter side, too.

-Of course, you really need to read the [Solution] and [Tutorial] first to usefully discuss notation issues.  If you want to discuss changes to the notation, you really need to read [Rationale], [Modifications-0.3], and [Modifications-0.4] first.
+Of course, you really need to read the [Solution] and [Tutorial] first to usefully discuss notation issues.  If you want to discuss changes to the notation, you really need to read the [Rationale] first.

 We love code contributions!  Code is maintained in our [git repository](https://sourceforge.net/p/readable/code/); see [Workflow] for how we manage the code branches.

 We want the code to be portable.  [It's hard to write portable Scheme code](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11062320/writing-portable-scheme-code-is-anything-standard-beyond-r5rs-itself).  Generally, we stick with R5RS, since [most Scheme implementations are not going to implement R6RS](http://lists.r6rs.org/pipermail/r6rs-discuss/2007-October/003351.html).  That can be challenging, e.g., R5RS (and before) don't have a module system, nor a simple exception-raising system.  R7RS looks very promising, but it's not even out yet.

-Obsolete materials are in [SRFI-Curly-issues], [SRFI-Curly], [SRFI-Neoteric], and [R7RS].
+Obsolete materials are in [SRFI-Curly-issues], [SRFI-Curly], [SRFI-Neoteric], and [R7RS].  You can also see old modifications:
+
+* [Modifications-0.3] - Items that were discussed and resolved to create specification version 0.3.
+* [Modifications-0.4] - Items that were discussed and resolved to create specification version 0.4.
+* [Modifications-0.5] - Items that were discussed and resolved to create specification version 0.5.
+* [Modifications-0.6] - Items that were discussed and resolved to create specification version 0.6 (all due to SRFI-105)
+* [Modifications-0.7] - Items whose discussion is ongoing.

Join modified by David A. Wheeler

David A. Wheeler — Thu, 09 May 2013 03:42:38 -0000

--- v23
+++ v24
@@ -23,6 +23,5 @@

 Obsolete materials are in [SRFI-Curly-issues], [SRFI-Curly], [SRFI-Neoteric], and [R7RS].

-For Common Lisp, obviously, stick to Common Lisp.  The challenge here is that there's no standard representation for quasiquoting, etc., like there is in Scheme.

WikiPage Join modified by David A. Wheeler

David A. Wheeler — Wed, 19 Dec 2012 18:56:03 -0000

--- v22
+++ v23
@@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
 * [Modifications-0.6] - Items that were discussed and resolved to create specification version 0.6 (all due to SRFI-105)
 * [Modifications-0.7] - Items whose discussion is ongoing.
 * [Precedence] - Curly-infix does not have precedence, by intent.  If you *must* have precedence, here's an approach
+* [Parser-tools] - discussion of various tools that might help parsing, primarily LL-based tools
 * [Humor] - Our community has a lighter side, too.

 Of course, you really need to read the [Solution] and [Tutorial] first to usefully discuss notation issues.  If you want to discuss changes to the notation, you really need to read [Rationale], [Modifications-0.3], and [Modifications-0.4] first.