Some questions on Slate syntax

[Shaping]

> It's not just tailored more to how computers work. When it
> comes down to it, it makes as much intuitive sense as any
> other way. Starting from the origin, how far away is some
> thing? Giving you a spatial metaphor for working with items
> I would argue makes it easier to see in your head what you're
> doing. I can easily visualize grid space, but I can't easily
> visualize a jumble of objects that I've counted.
Becareful not to confuse continuous measurement with discrete counting.  Both 
have there uses.  If you can count/order, do that because it is more basic than 
ruling/measuring on a continuous axis.  Note the essential difference:
--------------------
    1      2     ...
0.0   1.0    2.0 ...
--------------------
>
> Counting makes sense to me for talking about the size of a
> collection, but really makes no intuitive sense to me elsewhere.

Then think "order" not "size", and clarity will return.

> Now, maybe I have been programming too long and have built
> up a new set of intuitions,

Indeed, all of us, but these conditionings do not preclude realignment with 
natural principle, both in computer language and hardware structure (which is 
yet to happen).


Shaping