[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Format strings are wrong
I think at a general level, your criticisms are a good attack on
a style of I/O programming. However, it isn't a style of I/O
programming that is going to go away, and I think it is worth
supporting, cf. Bear's last message for a defence that C-style
output, if broken is at least not abjectly broken.
Maybe a useful way to advance the discussion is to break it up
in two parts:
1. Merits of C-style vs. functional-style output formatters
2. Merits of Ken's proposal as a C-style output formatter
Maybe also it is worth the final SRFI including a relationship of
the C-style formatter to a functional style formatter (eg. the
semantics could be a transformation from the one to the other).
Specific points and criticisms:
1. I think single letter escapes are fine: like mathematical
constants if you use or often read them, you'll remember them.
However, I would like it to be the case that you don't need to have
memorised the whole table to be able to tell consuming escapes from
non-consuming escapes (eg. upper case vs. lower case, alphnumeric vs.
2. Is it good to have both ~? and ~K: why have backward compatibility
cruft in the first SRFI? Explanation, please!
3. It seems to me the nicest functional formatter uses the standard
string concatenater together with quasiquotation.