xxxxxx@autodrip.bloodandcoffee.net wrote:
>
> By the way, how does the proposed array syntax relate to quasiquotation
> & syntax-rules?

Good point! Arrays would not have the same status as lists and vectors
unless the quasiquotation and syntax-rules pattern/template
syntax&semantics were extended to deal with them.

One also needs to consider the general implications of adding new types
of literals to the syntax. It requires the extension, or at least
careful examination, of any code that treats programs as data. Given
that the programs-as-data philosophy is one of the hallmarks of Scheme,
there is a lot of code in current use that would have to be
extended/examined.

To make matters worse, unless the new literal syntax is part of the core
standard (as vectors are, but arrays are not), there are significant
complications in writing portable programs-as-data code that works both
Schemes with and without the literal extensions in question.

Matthias.