I’m not a fan of the “parenthesis pileup” tradition of LISP code
layout. Having used a number of different programming languages over
the years, I have evolved a common set layout conventions that has
worked reasonably well across them. So for example, when parentheses
in LISP represent something resembling statement blocks, I like to put
the openers and closers at the same indentation level, which means
putting the closer on a line by itself. This, accompanied by a comment
indicating the type of construct being closed, I think helps a lot
with readability. Elisp example:

(defun convert-to-region-codes (beg end)
"converts alphabetic characters in the selection to “region indicator symbols”."
(interactive "*r")
(unless (use-region-p)
(ding)
(keyboard-quit)
) ; unless
(let
(
deactivate-mark
(intext (delete-and-extract-region beg end))
c
)
(dotimes (i (- end beg))
(setq c (elt intext i))
(cond
((and (>= c ?A) (<= c ?Z))
(setq c (+ (- c ?A) #x1F1E6))
)
((and (>= c ?a) (<= c ?z))
(setq c (+ (- c ?a) #x1F1E6))
)
) ; cond
(insert-char c)
) ; dotimes
) ; let
) ; convert-to-region-codes

On 2024-01-02, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> I’m not a fan of the “parenthesis pileup” tradition of LISP code
> layout.

Well, you came to the right language. Odds are high that you will be
working alone in Lisp (not called LISP for a few decades now, by the
way).

So you will never run into a situation in which you're asked
to produce normal looking code ending in ))))) pringles.

(Unless you do something silly, like contribute a patch to someone
else's existing project.)

> Having used a number of different programming languages over
> the years, I have evolved a common set layout conventions that has
> worked reasonably well across them. So for example, when parentheses
> in LISP represent something resembling statement blocks, I like to put
> the openers and closers at the same indentation level, which means
> putting the closer on a line by itself. This, accompanied by a comment
> indicating the type of construct being closed, I think helps a lot
> with readability. Elisp example:
>
> (defun convert-to-region-codes (beg end)
> "converts alphabetic characters in the selection to “region indicator symbols”."
> (interactive "*r")
> (unless (use-region-p)
> (ding)
> (keyboard-quit)
> ) ; unless
> (let
> (
> deactivate-mark
> (intext (delete-and-extract-region beg end))
> c
> )
> (dotimes (i (- end beg))
> (setq c (elt intext i))
> (cond
> ((and (>= c ?A) (<= c ?Z))
> (setq c (+ (- c ?A) #x1F1E6))
> )
> ((and (>= c ?a) (<= c ?z))
> (setq c (+ (- c ?a) #x1F1E6))
> )
> ) ; cond
> (insert-char c)
> ) ; dotimes
> ) ; let
> ) ; convert-to-region-codes

You forgot a few, for instance:

((and (>= c
l?A) ;; >=
(<= c
?Z) ;; <=
) ;; and
(setq c
(+ (- c
?A
) ;; -
#x1F1E6
) ;; +
) ;; setq
) ;; cond pair

You go show `em how it oughtta be formatted!

--
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca
NOTE: If you use Google Groups, I don't see you, unless you're whitelisted.

On Tue, 2 Jan 2024 06:30:40 -0000 (UTC), Kaz Kylheku wrote:

> On 2024-01-02, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>> So for example, when parentheses in LISP represent something
>> resembling statement blocks, I like to put the openers and closers at
>> the same indentation level, which means putting the closer on a line
>> by itself.
>
> You forgot a few, for instance:

Would you say those were “resembling statement blocks”?

Hi,

I using Common LISP, and I doing my Code-Formatting like You.
Because I came from different Language's, too.

From BASIC, to dBASE, to C/C++, to Pascal, to HTML...

In BASIC, I wrote very ugly Spagetty-Code in the first Time.
Then, something in the middle of all, I learn the Block-Scoped
Programming Style like:

BEGIN
BEGIN
...
END
END.

As I came to LISP, it was a Horror for me, and I don't could
understood, why the Programmers did use the old LISP-Style-Guide.

Some Times, I visit the LISP IRC Channels on freenode, I you can
thinking what happend...

Yes, they bann me :(

And since this, I learn more like before by doing-your-self with
Tutorials - but a coding Style, that is more modern, and suiteable
to all DSL, that I learn, and I think, I would learn.

This is not a good Sign, that old DSL die, and the existing Experts
goes into silent age.

And this is not, what me make the Language wrong. I use it very
often in my spare Time.

Many things you can do with it - but, you have to do many improvements
to hold the line with modern Applications.

Today, I think, it is not possible to "only" use one DSL for your
Projects !

So, I use SWI-Prolog, too.

My actual Project is a very strange, and Large Project - A more than
one Lifetime Project - to combine the advantages of all (okay: many)
under the hat of one Suite.

My ideas are so many, I have no Time for it :-)

Thanks for reading
Jens

--
Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast-Antivirussoftware auf Viren geprüft.
www.avast.com