On 8/9/05, Keith Wright <xxxxxx@free-comp-shop.com> wrote:
>
> To avoid confusion, and make it easier to write portable
> programs, it would be better to have distinct names for
> these two distinct pairs of procedures.  Then maybe one
> could be defined in terms of the other.  I don't know
> if this would be possible, it would probably be slow,
> but it is certainly more difficult if the two pairs of
> procedures have the same names!
>
> Since the defining characteristic of the SRFI system is that
> there are no special syntax objects, just lists of
> identifiers, they might be called |datum->syntax-list| and
> |syntax-list->datum|, or just go back to the original
> shorter names.
>

I strongly agree. Besides "datum->syntax"/"syntax->datum"
is shorter and doesn't look less intuitive to me than the
"-syntax-object" names (because, as Keith already pointed
out, they don't really deal with distinct syntax objects, but
with s-expressions - albeit in a syntactic context).

cheers,
felix