I said:
> > Once it's removed from the BNF, I think we need to make sure that the
> > Scheme specifically checks for it and forbids it.  That way, people won't
> > accidentally use such constructs for now, and that'll make it easier to
> > add later if indeed it's added later.

Alan Manuel Gloria:
> I propose making it an explicit error in the BNF rather than just
> making it an invalid sequence by implication of its absence.

Okay, I'll do that.

--- David A. Wheeler

Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
Readable-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to