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

Re: updated srfi-109 - cleaning up discussion items

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 109 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 109 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

Per Bothner scripsit:

> (1) "Discussion: It may be useful to allow an option to use a
> user-defined token, following a marker character - for example!"

I think this is a very useful option, though if you want to leave it out
I'm fine with that too.  I prefer the second (symmetrical) syntax.

> Perhaps we can change the rule for &| - it deletes any
> prior whitespace in that line. It *also* deletes the prior
> newline if this is an initial newline.

That is the HTML/SGML rule, and I think it is exactly right.

> (4) "Discussion: The above example is a bit ugly; it might be reasonable
> to allow comments before the line-start marker:"

Frankly, I think this blows either way.  I think the balance between
regularity and convenience should tip on the side of regularity here.

> I.e. "&" followed by a single character followed by ";"
> is equivalent to that literal character.  Is this convenient
> enough to make up for adding yet more weird syntax?


> I.e. &\n for newline.

That has slightly more merit, but not that much.

> (7) "Discussion: It may be reasonable to move format support to a
> separate SRFI, where we could also cover string localization."


John Cowan        http://ccil.org/~cowan   cowan@xxxxxxxx
Lope de Vega: "It wonders me I can speak at all.  Some caitiff rogue
did rudely yerk me on the knob, wherefrom my wits yet wander."
An Englishman: "Ay, belike a filchman to the nab'll leave you
crank for a spell." --Harry Turtledove, Ruled Britannia