updated SRFI-108
Per Bothner
(04 Feb 2013 00:21 UTC)
|
Re: updated SRFI-108
John Cowan
(04 Feb 2013 08:16 UTC)
|
Re: updated SRFI-108
Per Bothner
(04 Feb 2013 20:29 UTC)
|
Re: updated SRFI-108 Per Bothner (04 Feb 2013 20:43 UTC)
|
Re: updated SRFI-108
John Cowan
(05 Feb 2013 01:24 UTC)
|
Re: updated SRFI-108
Shiro Kawai
(05 Feb 2013 02:11 UTC)
|
Re: updated SRFI-108
Per Bothner
(05 Feb 2013 02:24 UTC)
|
Re: updated SRFI-108
John Cowan
(05 Feb 2013 07:54 UTC)
|
Re: updated SRFI-108
Per Bothner
(05 Feb 2013 08:15 UTC)
|
Re: updated SRFI-108
John Cowan
(05 Feb 2013 15:42 UTC)
|
Re: updated SRFI-108
Per Bothner
(22 Feb 2013 00:36 UTC)
|
Re: updated SRFI-108
John Cowan
(22 Feb 2013 03:10 UTC)
|
Re: updated SRFI-108 Per Bothner 04 Feb 2013 20:43 UTC
On 02/04/2013 12:29 PM, Per Bothner wrote: > A possible solution/compromise is to *require* that "&name[initial-exp]" > be followed by a braced-delimited literal part, if necessary empty: > &name[initial-exp]{} > This avoids the incompatibility. It makes parsing slightly more > complex, but the extra code and state needed is small. To clarify: Parsing is slightly more complex if an implementation wishes to support *both* SRFI-108 and R6RS brackets-as-parens (or Kawa's brackets-as-vector-constructor). At least if not requiring a separator between a symbol and a starting bracket. -- --Per Bothner xxxxxx@bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/