On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 10:59 AM Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen < [email protected]> wrote:
> Only the names of condition types use the ampersand as a prefix > That's true, but I took it to be an accidental consequence of the fact that R6RS does not standardize any record types other than (simple) condition types. I see, however, that there are some examples in library section 6.2, none of which have ampersands. And for record names that actually start with an ampersand, there > would be an unfortunate doubling of ampersands: #&(&message "a stored > message condition"). > I think that is extremely minor. > Anyway, #& is already used; see your SRFI 111, where you collected > existing lexical syntax for boxes. > True; I forgot about that. The idea is that #!srfi-237 is a comment as far as the lexical syntax > and its transcription into syntactical data is concerned. Moreover, > when a reader supporting SRFI 237 reads it, it must enable the > external representation of records described in SRFI 237 on subsequent > input and may, therefore, have to disable conflicting > implementation-specific lexical syntax. An implementation not > supporting SRFI 237 should signal a reader error. > Okay, please use this language (vel sim.) instead.
