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

Re: Should we MAY a "curly-write" and "neoteric-write"? Or even "sweet-write"?

David A. Wheeler scripsit:

> "Implementations <em>MAY</em> provide the procedures
> <var>curly-write</var>, <var>neoteric-write</var>, and/or <var>sweet-write</var>
> as writers that can write c-expressions, n-expressions, and t-expressions respectively.

I'd say forget sweet-write and go with curly-write and neoteric-write,
and go ahead and use MUST modals for them, without overspecifying
what they output.  R7RS systems MUST provide curly-write{simple,shared}
and neoteric-write-{simple,shared} as well.

As long as there is a good reference implementation, there is no reason
not to require these things.

Overhead, without any fuss, the stars were going out.
        --Arthur C. Clarke, "The Nine Billion Names of God"
                John Cowan <cowan@xxxxxxxx>