Lambda syntax, etc

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

grauzone wrote:
>> What I see above is a smörgåsbord of syntaxes that shoot all over the 
>> proverbial barn door in the hope that one of them would strike 
>> someone's fancy. That strikes me as a rather lousily done job. Also, 
>> it is my 
> 
> I find this statement rather ironic, because you also seem to be quite 
> happy with your code-as-string-literal approach.

I do understand you dislike strings as lambdas, but please do not use 
that dislike as a presupposition of a truth.

Besides, there is no correlation. D offers two syntaxes, a decent lambda 
syntax (that is being improved) and a string syntax for short 
predicates. They have clear and distinct tradeoffs and charters. In 
contrast, C# seems to have decided to allow pretty much all syntax 
variations that parse unambiguously. You can only wonder what C#4 has in 
store.

> Your approach doesn't 
> even enforce any syntax, instead, everyone is free to invent his own.

There's only so many ways to write an expression involving one or two 
given symbols.


Andrei