Re: gnome-config problems

[Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic srce hr>]

Jason Gilbert <jason@scott.net> writes:

> Hrvoje Niksic wrote:
> > 
> > Jason Gilbert <jason@scott.net> writes:
> > 
> > > > 5 times less redundant,
> > >
> > > I guess the redundency is the clarity of the option names?
> > 
> > No, the redundancy is in <FOO>...</FOO> being longer than (FOO ...)
> 
> I would say this is clarity. (...)

Now tastes *are* different, but I think most of the Lisp/Scheme
hackers here will agree that (FOO ...) reads easier.

> > > How many web browsers are out there now?
> > > How many people are dynamically generating HTML on the fly w/ cgi?
> > 
> > What is your point?  SGML is *very* hard to parse correctly.  Scheme
> > is trivial in comparison.
> 
> I wasn't talking about SGML, I'm talking about having a small,
> modified HTML-ish config spec.

That's what SGML is for, you know.

> HTML can't be that hard to parse,

It is extremely hard to parse, as anyone who ever tried to parse it
will tell you.

-- 
Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> | Student at FER Zagreb, Croatia
--------------------------------+--------------------------------
I'm a Lisp variable -- bind me!