write-bytevector, write & co.
Lassi Kortela
(16 Aug 2020 10:24 UTC)
|
||
Re: write-bytevector, write & co.
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(16 Aug 2020 10:33 UTC)
|
||
Re: write-bytevector, write & co.
Daphne Preston-Kendal
(16 Aug 2020 10:37 UTC)
|
||
Re: write-bytevector, write & co.
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(16 Aug 2020 10:44 UTC)
|
||
Configuring read and write for syntax extensions
Lassi Kortela
(16 Aug 2020 11:04 UTC)
|
||
Re: Configuring read and write for syntax extensions
Shiro Kawai
(16 Aug 2020 11:46 UTC)
|
||
Re: Configuring read and write for syntax extensions
Lassi Kortela
(16 Aug 2020 11:55 UTC)
|
||
Re: Configuring read and write for syntax extensions
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(16 Aug 2020 11:59 UTC)
|
||
Re: Configuring read and write for syntax extensions
Lassi Kortela
(16 Aug 2020 12:06 UTC)
|
||
Re: Configuring read and write for syntax extensions
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(16 Aug 2020 12:25 UTC)
|
||
User-defined writers and recursive write
Lassi Kortela
(16 Aug 2020 12:38 UTC)
|
||
(missing)
|
||
(missing)
|
||
Re: User-defined writers and recursive write
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(16 Aug 2020 13:32 UTC)
|
||
Re: Configuring read and write for syntax extensions Lassi Kortela (16 Aug 2020 12:26 UTC)
|
||
Re: Configuring read and write for syntax extensions
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(16 Aug 2020 12:33 UTC)
|
||
Re: Configuring read and write for syntax extensions
Lassi Kortela
(16 Aug 2020 12:50 UTC)
|
||
Re: Configuring read and write for syntax extensions
Shiro Kawai
(16 Aug 2020 12:32 UTC)
|
||
Re: Configuring read and write for syntax extensions
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(16 Aug 2020 12:35 UTC)
|
||
Re: Configuring read and write for syntax extensions
Lassi Kortela
(16 Aug 2020 12:44 UTC)
|
||
Re: Configuring read and write for syntax extensions
Shiro Kawai
(16 Aug 2020 12:53 UTC)
|
||
Re: Configuring read and write for syntax extensions
John Cowan
(17 Aug 2020 16:58 UTC)
|
Ideally we would have 1:1 correspondence between port syntax settings and #! directives. Any setting could be represented by a #! directive and vice versa. This would make it easy to understand how to configure the lexical syntax from Scheme, and how it relates to the directives. However, since we have no precedent for this, many implementations currently have their own slightly different syntax. We could coin #! directives for them after the fact (e.g. #!gauche for Gauche). However, if those implementations themselves don't recognize the flags with their own names, the situation would be a bit embarrassing. Anyway, as things stand, #! is always followed by an identifier. So the Scheme representation of the port settings could simply be a list of symbols that are currently enabled. For paired ones (currently just #!fold-case and #!no-fold-case) one could be translated into the other; if that setting has the default value, the corresponding symbol could simply be missing from the list.