Consensus on line directives? Lassi Kortela (20 Apr 2021 07:45 UTC)
|
Re: Consensus on line directives?
Lassi Kortela
(20 Apr 2021 07:56 UTC)
|
Re: Consensus on line directives?
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(20 Apr 2021 07:58 UTC)
|
Re: Consensus on line directives?
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(20 Apr 2021 08:03 UTC)
|
Re: Consensus on line directives?
Lassi Kortela
(20 Apr 2021 08:11 UTC)
|
Re: Consensus on line directives?
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(20 Apr 2021 08:20 UTC)
|
Design aesthetics
Lassi Kortela
(20 Apr 2021 08:31 UTC)
|
Re: Consensus on line directives?
Lassi Kortela
(20 Apr 2021 08:07 UTC)
|
Consensus on line directives? Lassi Kortela 20 Apr 2021 07:45 UTC
SRFI 220 is past the 60-day milestone. Do we have what it takes to achieve consensus on it? If not, I'd rather withdraw it and leave it as documentation for future work on the topic. - The current approach, of parsing "#! ..." lines as Scheme code, works quite well but so far I'm the only one who thinks we should do that. - Taking "#! ..." lines as raw strings and parsing each idiosyncratic syntax in a hook procedure works, and I'm willing to switch to that if people agree to it. - Using characters other than "#!" has been suggested. I'm very much in favor of "#!" since we have it already; Marc N-W thinks it's confusing to conflate the new meaning of "#! ..." as a line directive with the existing meanings of directives like "#!r6rs" and Unix shebang lines like "#! /usr/bin/env fantastic-scheme".