[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: SRFI 105: Curly-infix-expressions

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 105 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 105 are here. Eventually, the entire history will be moved there, including any new messages.



John Cowan:
> Insofar as possible, the
> R7RS-small committee doesn't consider proposals that don't already have
> widespread implementations; this one is certainly not ripe.  If there
> is substantial traction for this in the next year or two (which will
> take heroic lobbying efforts), you can ask for it to be added to the
> WG2 input hopper.

Yes, it's my hope that we get it into the WG2 input hopper. But I completely agree, a standards group should generally be standardizing stuff that is already implemented, preferably in many places.  I don't expect WG1 to consider this.  My hope for WG1 is that they don't endorse something that would make this impossible later (and I don't think they have).

One thing that'd be *nice* would be if WG1-small would be willing to add "{" and "}" as delimiters.  But it's certainly not necessary, and I've been presuming that we wouldn't be able to influence WG1-small, given the current state.

--- David A. Wheeler