6 ms·
I didn't end up with ))))))))) in Scheme because it was easy to create smaller functions. I do see rust ending with } } } In TypeScript I'll often
by brlewis 3y ago
I didn't end up with ))))))))) in Scheme because it was easy to create smaller functions. I do see rust ending with
}
}
}
In TypeScript I'll often find myself ending blocks of code with
});
}
});
}
I'm having fun with TS, but I do miss the parentheses. They were simpler.
- HexDecOctBin 3y ago1. Lots of small functions lead to code in which bugs often hide in plain sight, see this old memo by John Carmack: http://number-none.com/blow/john_carmack_on_inlined_code.html http://number-none.com/blow/john_carmack_on_inlined_code.htm... 2. Scheme is better than Common Lisp when it comes to Lots of Irritating Superfluous Parenthesis, since declaring a variable in Scheme (using 'define') doesn't create a new nesting like it does in Common Lisp (using 'let').