The specification of #= seems to be ill defined with respect to its
interaction with reader macros. Take this:
#1=(1 2 3 #.(print '#1#))
it crashes SBCL and produces garbage in ECL. Similar problems about the
interaction between #+ and #=
(1 2 #+#1=(:ecl) 3 #+#1# 4)
or the interaction with #.
(1 #1=2 #.(print #1#))
Is the reader for #+,#. expected to do some sharp-eq replacement in the
resulting forms? What about user code implementing reader macros? How shound
ECL recognize that an eager replacement is needed when reading inside some
user reader macro, specially if he/she uses :recursive t???
Juanjo
--
Instituto de Física Fundamental, CSIC
c/ Serrano, 113b, Madrid 28006 (Spain)
http://juanjose.garciaripoll.googlepages.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn how Oracle Real Application Clusters (RAC) One Node allows customers
to consolidate database storage, standardize their database environment, and,
should the need arise, upgrade to a full multi-node Oracle RAC database
without downtime or disruption
http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnl
_______________________________________________
Ecls-list mailing list
Ecls-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ecls-list
