Per Bothner <xxxxxx@bothner.com> writes:

> On 09/11/2015 03:04 PM, John Cowan wrote:
>> Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer scripsit:
>>
>>> Still, I guess I'll make it optional, along with weak/ephemeral
>>> hashtables, so there's still some utility of the SRFI for those who
>>> don't like all of it.
>>
>> I have no problem with making it optional.  But I suggest that in that
>> case you adopt Racket's lexical syntax rather than a minor change from
>> it, so there will at least be some implementation.
>
> I agree.
>
> A bonus is if hashtables take part in quasi-quotation, so
> you could use the "same" syntax for computed values:
>
>    `#hash((,n1 . ,v1) (,n2 . ,v2))
>
> In the above n1 v1 n2 v2 are computed expressions.
>
> Regardless, the result should (probably) be an immutable hash-table.

Indeed, I just pushed a change to my live version that specifies
quasiquote's behavior on hashtables.

https://github.com/TaylanUB/srfi-126/blob/master/srfi-126.md#quasiquote

(Note that I frequently force-push to that repo, until the next draft is
stabilized.)

Taylan