Eh, I thought this was part of the definition of "#-based comment", which is basically anything that starts with #\# but doesn't cause the reader to yield a datum.Â This includes #| |# and #;.Â So #!sweet and friends would be treated the same as #| |# in indentation processing.
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Beni Cherniavsky-Paskin <cben@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The spec is not particularly clear on what crazy things like this mean:(( ... #!sweet ...) ... #!no-sweet ... ( ...Â#!curly-infix ...)) ...or this:
define foo()! a b! #!no-sweet! c dAs written, it sounds that the directives must have a flat, global effect on the port, crossing all ( ) boundaries.But correctly implementing this sounds painful to me. ÂE.g. you can't call a lower-level (read) / (neoteric-read) unless they understand these directives. ÂAnd every procedure must be ready for sweet processing to be turned off underneath it.I propose for simplicity to say that these directives SHOULD (MUST?) be used only at top level.Probably also require them to be alone on a line, at column 0 (trailing hspace and comments are ok)?
And say that implementations MAY signal an error if used otherwise.--ÂBeni Cherniavsky-Paskin