Hi Ludovic + Ricardo! Ricardo Wurmus <rek...@elephly.net> writes:
>> We could probably arrange so that ‘gexp->sexp’ reports about objects >> without a read syntax that remain in the resulting sexp. > > This is a good idea. It’s never the right thing for unreadable syntax > to appear in a generated S-expression when using Gexps, so producing an > error at conversion time seems much better. I agree that this would be a good way of going about improving error reporting. Admittedly, I have very little experience augmenting the Lisp reader, so I wouldn't be much help here. Regards, Jakob
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
