Yes, it really should, but I want to encourage people to change their readtables to invert.
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 8:04 AM, Miron Brezuleanu mbrezu@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 1:04 AM, Vladimir Sedach vsedach@gmail.com wrote:
(ps (new (Person age shoe-size))) outputs new Person(age, shoeSize)
This brings up a good point about the syntax of 'new'. Maybe the above is not a good way?
In any case, I've written up a description of how 'new' works now in the reference manual (http://common-lisp.net/project/parenscript/reference.html).
Thanks for the information! The existing syntax is OK by me, the only bug was the lack of documentation, which is now fixed. I think changing the syntax would break a lot of code and give people trouble without good reason.
One nitpick: with READTABLE-CASE set to :UPCASE the example in the manual should read '(new (-person age shoe-size))' - or am I missing something else?
Thank you again,
-- Miron Brezuleanu
parenscript-devel mailing list parenscript-devel@common-lisp.net http://lists.common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/parenscript-devel