"John.Cowan" <xxxxxx@reutershealth.com> writes:

> Jorgen Schaefer scripsit:
>
>> That Scheme does not allow read syntax modification is, in my
>> opinion, a good thing.
>
> Distinguo.  Scheme does not *forbid* read syntax modification; it merely
> provides no standard way to specify it.

Scheme, as specified in R5RS, does not allow read syntax
modification. If you do it, it's not R5RS Scheme anymore.

>> - and that only includes the curly
>> braces after the syntax modification of this SRFI/R6RS.
>
> Section 7.1.1 of R5RS specifically says:
>
> 	The following five characters are reserved for future extensions
> 	to the language: [ ] { } |

Yes, [ and ] will be equivalent to parens in R6RS, and | is used
for literal symbols. The curly braces remain.

>> Your list also includes quite a few characters which I
>> definitively would like to allow in identifiers, if we allow
>> Unicode characters at all[1] (These include the reversed question
>> mark, among others).
>
> I wouldn't be averse to removing a few characters ad hoc on the grounds
> that they have close ASCII relatives that we already allow in identifiers.

I have a short list of 186 characters I would like to remove from
your proposal, do you want me to post it? :-)

Greetings,
        -- Jorgen

--
((email . "xxxxxx@forcix.cx") (www . "http://www.forcix.cx/")
 (gpg   . "1024D/028AF63C")   (irc . "nick forcer on IRCnet"))