Regarding using ":", I just checked out SRFI-88 (Keyword objects) here: http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-88/srfi-88.html
In systems that implement SRFI-88, a sequence of text ending in ":" is a keyword and NOT a symbol. Interestingly enough, there's an exception - a ":" by itself continues to be a symbol. It appears that there are 5 Scheme implementations that implement SRFI-88, and 3 that implement the related SRFI-89 (Optional positional and named parameters, which use keywords): https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tRCHK6jWXuKMABKAfoOwWqw So it seems that ":" *could* be used for SUBLIST in Scheme. I still worry about problems using it with other Lisps. The data we have so far suggests to me that "$" is slightly better than ":". The ":" is used more than "$" as an operator in Emacs Lisp, and "$" is the standard name in Haskell. But it's no slam-dunk case. Are there other reasons (or amplifications of them) to prefer "$", ":", or some other sequence of characters? --- David A. Wheeler ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS, MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft MVPs and experts. SALE $99.99 this month only -- learn more at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122912 _______________________________________________ Readable-discuss mailing list Readable-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/readable-discuss
