loss of abstraction Andrew Wilcox (22 Aug 2005 15:46 UTC)
Re: loss of abstraction Michael Sperber (22 Aug 2005 16:09 UTC)
(missing)
(missing)
Re: loss of abstraction bear (23 Aug 2005 18:37 UTC)
(missing)
(missing)
Re: loss of abstraction Andre van Tonder (23 Aug 2005 15:08 UTC)
Re: loss of abstraction Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk (23 Aug 2005 15:54 UTC)
Re: loss of abstraction Andre van Tonder (23 Aug 2005 16:19 UTC)
Re: loss of abstraction Andre van Tonder (23 Aug 2005 15:55 UTC)

Re: loss of abstraction Andre van Tonder 23 Aug 2005 15:55 UTC

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Michael Sperber wrote:

> I want to change the representation ot carry location
> information, possibly to record if parens or brackets were used,
> possibly whether dots appeared in the source code, possibly comments,
> and probably all kinds of other stuff in the future.

Should I be able to write Scheme code whose meaning depends on page layout,
dots, whitespace, or comments?  I don't think I ever should.  The
syntax-as-lists abstraction has the decided advantage of protecting me against
these things, which are generally regarded as wrong in the Lisp/Scheme
community.

Cheers
Andre