[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: updated SRFI-108
On 02/04/2013 05:24 PM, John Cowan wrote:
A possible solution/compromise is to *require* that "&name[initial-exp]"
be followed by a braced-delimited literal part, if necessary empty:
This avoids the incompatibility.
I can live with that. I have yet to be convinced once and for all that
initial-expressions are actually as useful as all that. I'd rather
leave them as an optional extension.
Probably, but the difference is one of whitespace only, and it makes
(foo &condition [bar 1 2])
(foo &condition[bar 1 2])
differ very radically. If initial & was rare, I'd probably feel better
about this, but it's common in SRFI 35 or R6RS code that deals with
Fair enough. I made this change in
I can make initial expressions an optional extension if it is likely
to lead to more implementations supporting SRFI-108. Implementors,
let me know.