Re: A Sugar Free Diet?

[Andrew Starks <andrew.starks@...>]

On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 8:59 AM, steve donovan <steve.j.donovan@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Michael Richter <ttmrichter@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Syntax sugar is nice.  It makes syntax taste good.  Too much of it, however,
>> is "empty calories" which should be avoided in large quantities.
>
> The issue comes from a noun escaping from a technical phrase.
> "syntactical sugar" is conventional and doesn't carry too many
> connotations, certainly not as Roberto uses it, but sugar ... we have
> _all_ been told about sugar! [1]
>
> The phrase Andrew used "short cut" (or maybe "short hand") is more
> neutral.  The convenient form of function "declaration" is a good
> example - although it's useful pedagogically to use full form to
> emphasize that it is the assignment of a function value to a variable.
>
> "sugar" also implies a kind of frosting on the cake, a few cherries
> that cause no harm (you can always refuse to eat the cherries) but
> really it does involve more syntax, and has to be well-chosen not to
> confuse people or machines.
>
> [1] that Lisp guy who said "syntactical sugar causes cancer of the semi-colon" ?
>
perhaps "candy" would have been a better word, but we have "sugar", so...


-Andrew