This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 110 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 110 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
From: Alan Manuel Gloria <almkglor@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: The ". $" notation (was: Re: how useful are collecting lists?)
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 09:26:04 +0800
> 1. Allow "foo . EOL INDENT x ..." ==> "(foo . (x ...))"
> 2. Allow "foo . $ x ..." ==> "(foo x ...)"
Is the latter "foo . $ x y ..." ==> "(foo x y ...)"?
Because "$" is a valid R5RS identifier, we need to
parse "foo . $ EOL" as a cons of 'foo and '$, correct?
I'm a bit concerned that it might be confusing that:
foo . ($ a b c)
is
foo .
$ a b c
but
foo . $ $ a b c
(The two '$' has different meanings!)
But people may get used to it, after all.
(I jumped in because Gauche has a '$' macro. That allows
chaining function calls like Haskell's $ operator.)
--shiro