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

Re: optional user-specified end-delimiters



On 04/16/2013 11:41 PM, John Cowan wrote:
The more I think about these, the less I think any of them are all that
useful.  XML are what it is (and so is LaTeX and other self-delimiting
markup schemes), but I don't think their ideas need to be pervasive: the
increasing popularity of JSON (which is just S-expressions with braces)
over XML shows that.

I am not one to say "Well, it's bad for the unaided user, but it's
all right if you have the right tools", but I think paren-counting
(brace-counting, etc.)  tools are a price we already pay in Scheme, and I
think we should avoid further complicating something that is already very
bell-and-whistle-filled with all these alternative delimitation schemes.
Let's just stick to "} matches { and ] matches [" and that's all there
needs to be to it.

In that case I will things more-or-less as-is.

I've uploaded revised versions to:
http://per.bothner.com/tmp/srfi-108/srfi-108.html
http://per.bothner.com/tmp/srfi-109/srfi-109.html
The only substantial change is allowing "." as tagname-subsequent.
I think these are finalization-candidates.
--
	--Per Bothner
per@xxxxxxxxxxx   http://per.bothner.com/