On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 12:53:44PM +0200, Jussi Piitulainen wrote: > > Don't forget that string->symbol exists, and if it doesn't live by > > the same restrictions, will be capable of generating symbols that > > can't be represented with WRITE. And if it does live by those > > restrictions, it'll be faintly annoying that strings and symbols > > aren't symmetrical. > > Such symmetry could be had on the cheap by building the escape syntax > for symbols directly on string syntax, say #"102" instead of |102|. > > Just a thought.
Let's not invent new things. The report is supposed to represent current practice and not invent new things. I don't know of any existing Scheme that uses this syntax. > > The text on identifiers in 2.1 says that . is not an identifier; does > > that mean I *cannot* write (define |.| 123) and then (+ |.| 456)? > > I think it only means that you cannot write (define . 123) but must > write (define |.| 123) instead. Actually, I think (define |.| 123) (+ |.| 456) is correct. Why would define be treated differently (and the reader doesn't know it's a define, either). Cheers, Peter -- http://sjamaan.ath.cx -- "The process of preparing programs for a digital computer is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic experience much like composing poetry or music." -- Donald Knuth _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
