zeabdullah commented 3 years ago

because

smokeytube commented 3 years ago

ok

danon commented 2 years ago

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

ushu3323 commented 2 years ago

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

jacksonbrumbaugh commented 2 years ago

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

danon commented 2 years ago

@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 commented 2 years ago

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 commented 2 years ago

Why not?

danon commented 2 years ago

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 commented 1 year ago

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

RickeyWard commented 1 year ago

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 commented 11 months ago

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

dov commented 7 months ago

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 commented 6 months ago

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 commented 1 month ago

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:

http://xahlee.info/comp/unicode_matching_brackets.html

http://xahlee.info/comp/unicode_math_brackets.html

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 commented 1 month ago

On 31 Aug 2024, at 19:46, Fatih Al-Aziz @.***> wrote:

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:

http://xahlee.info/comp/unicode_matching_brackets.html http://xahlee.info/comp/unicode_math_brackets.html

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

—Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: @.***>

rajathirumal commented 1 month ago

Because it's possible 😂

dov commented 1 month ago

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...).