This drives me nuts. I love LISP but refuse to pretend writing `)))))))` is reasonable.
Why are you writing ')))))' instead of your closing parenthesis being autogenerated. Sounds like a recipe for failure.
The 2026 version is: Why are you writing Lisp instead of your code being autogenerated. Sounds like a recipe for failure.
My editor (emacs) shows how I close the scopes and it is easy enough. I'm not sure why writing
) ) ) ) )
))))))) isn't so bad, but )))))))) is just getting ridiculous. You have to draw the line somewhere
picolisp has an interesting solution to this. A single ']' will close all open )'s for that block of code
That has to be a nightmare for parsers lol
not really. it's just pop all of the stack and return to depth 0. you can still detect imbalanced parens, but i'm not sure how it affects the provenance question of where a missing one would point out in errors.
Why are you writing ')))))' instead of your closing parenthesis being autogenerated. Sounds like a recipe for failure.
The 2026 version is: Why are you writing Lisp instead of your code being autogenerated. Sounds like a recipe for failure.
My editor (emacs) shows how I close the scopes and it is easy enough. I'm not sure why writing
would be so much better.))))))) isn't so bad, but )))))))) is just getting ridiculous. You have to draw the line somewhere
picolisp has an interesting solution to this. A single ']' will close all open )'s for that block of code
That has to be a nightmare for parsers lol
not really. it's just pop all of the stack and return to depth 0. you can still detect imbalanced parens, but i'm not sure how it affects the provenance question of where a missing one would point out in errors.