common code patterns

[Richard Gaskin]

Monte Goulding wrote:

 >> On 14 Aug 2017, at 5:45 pm, Mark Waddingham wrote:
 >>
 >> P.S. There is another quote-like char which could be used for
 >> an implicitly merged / escaped string literal - back-quote -
 >> `...`. So that should be considered too - one option would be
 >> single-quote and double-quote delimited strings are the same
 >> beyond the quote char; but back-quote delimited strings do
 >> more work, i.e. de-escape and potentially interpolate. (Of
 >> course, this does add *more* symbols to the language - but
 >> one thing symbols are good for is readable bracketing, so maybe
 >> that's a good justification).
 >
 > Haha… to quote you some 4 years ago after I suggested backtick:
 >
 >> Oh, please not backtick! The character is awkward to type (its one
 >> of the ones that moves around a lot on keyboard layouts) and
 >> difficult to read (and always makes me think something more is
 >> going on - e.g. as in bash scripts!).
 >
 > Mind you we have all written a _lot_ of markdown since then so
 > backtick is probably much more palatable.

But maybe not enough markdown to change how the human eye works. :)

I agree with MW's original assessment.

If we have a problem to solve for which no alternative is possible, I'd 
accept using backticks for some things.  But at least as far as my 
original request, and anything else I can conceive of offhand, I would 
prefer to avoid them for the reasons MW noted.

-- 
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Systems
  Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
  ____________________________________________________________________
  Ambassador at FourthWorld.com                http://www.FourthWorld.com