Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

why #38

Open
smokeytube opened this issue Jul 8, 2021 · 29 comments
Open

why #38

smokeytube opened this issue Jul 8, 2021 · 29 comments

Comments

@smokeytube
Copy link

No description provided.

@zeabdullah
Copy link

because

@smokeytube
Copy link
Author

ok

@danon
Copy link

danon commented Apr 4, 2022

@mathialo How do you not confuse braces from dictionaries and sets and braces from the syntax?

@ushu3323
Copy link

@danon The same way you do when coding with javascript and objects lol

@jacksonbrumbaugh
Copy link

trust me ... blocking out code segments via {...} is life~changing!

@danon
Copy link

danon commented Aug 17, 2022

@danon The same way you do when coding with javascript and objects lol

Which is how exactly?

JavaScript is the only langauge I know that has the same syntax for object literals and blocks, and I think it's a hige design flaw in the langauge. I don't think you should repeat that mistake.

@jacksonbrumbaugh
Copy link

If u like to count ur indentations to ensure that lines of code are within ur "def" or "if" statements => all power & luck to ya ... mostly the luck haha that's what ull need more of

@johnlettman
Copy link

Why not?

@danon
Copy link

danon commented Sep 7, 2022

If u like to count ur indentations to ensure that lines of code are within ur "def" or "if" statements => all power & luck to ya ... mostly the luck haha that's what ull need more of

Then you can use end keyword like in Ruby.

Or, if you want {/} for blocks, don't also use {/} for dictionaries, and say, only allow dict() syntax.

@barrybarrette
Copy link

Please leave this issue open forever or until you come to your senses and delete this repo, preferably the latter!

@RickeyWard
Copy link

JavaScript is the only langauge I know that has the same syntax for object literals and blocks, and I think it's a hige design flaw in the langauge. I don't think you should repeat that mistake.

You've never used c or c++ ?

Structure literals (objects before oop) are denoted using curly braces, just as its scope blocks are. It's been that way for 50 years and a lot of languages followed in its foot steps. So... rust, zig, go, c, cpp, JavaScript, c# and I'm sure many others all have some type of literal objects with curly braces while still having curly brace code blocks.

I'm not arguing one way or the other in this case, just confused why anyone would say this unless there never used c or any other c family programming language.

@sparklegem1
Copy link

because curly braces are pretty like flowers and vines adorning your code

@dov
Copy link

dov commented Mar 12, 2024

Why stop at braces, when there are a lot more bracket like symbols in Unicode :-) !? Here's one example:

if (foo < bar) ⦃ 
  # Your code here!
⦄ 

For additional examples see:

@zba
Copy link

zba commented Apr 8, 2024

Why stop at braces, when there are a lot more bracket like symbols in Unicode :-) !? Here's one example:

Because input for unicode inconvenient from keyboard.

@fatihaziz
Copy link

Why stop at braces, when there are a lot more bracket like symbols in Unicode :-) !? Here's one example:

if (foo < bar) ⦃ 
  # Your code here!
⦄ 

For additional examples see:

great idea, now instead pressing "{" and "}" directly on my keyboard, now i should use macro then bind "{" to copy then paste "⦃"
i love it!

@endasil
Copy link

endasil commented Aug 31, 2024 via email

@rajathirumal
Copy link

Because it's possible 😂

@dov
Copy link

dov commented Sep 4, 2024

Just a comment that user input shouldn't be a problem using something like ⦃, as you can always have the editor automatically merge the two characters "{|" after they have been input. Oldtimers like me may even remember that for Pascal (* and *) were equivalent to { and } because there were input encodings that did not support them. So you could in theory make your language support either two character versions like {|, or (:, or fancy unicode "joined" versions. (As long as there are no syntax clashes of course...).

@zuhaz
Copy link

zuhaz commented Sep 8, 2024

why

@IsusRamzy
Copy link

Somebody close this!

@Rudxain
Copy link

Rudxain commented Sep 13, 2024

Somebody close this!

That has "Quick! Kill it before it lays eggs!!" energy

@smokeytube2
Copy link

hello

@CrystalOfEnd
Copy link

why not

@IsusRamzy
Copy link

hello by @smokeytube2

What happened to @smokeytube?

@Kevinwang-138937492874982749827

trust me ... blocking out code segments via {...} is life~changing!

Agreed, made life more difficult

@smokeytube2
Copy link

hello by @smokeytube2

What happened to @smokeytube?

Lost my 2FA recovery codes

@chrissolanilla
Copy link

hello by @smokeytube2

What happened to @smokeytube?

Lost my 2FA recovery codes

rip, anyone here actually use Bython?

@thesolomon-tech
Copy link

I don't. I imagine someone uses it.

why not

@Kevinwang-138937492874982749827

I don't. I imagine someone uses it.

why not

Someone with his/her ENTER button malfunction😂

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests