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

Re: nested comments (please correct lexical scope)



> From: Paul Schlie <schlie@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> I suspect that part of my problem is that I also believe that quote ('),
> unquote(,), etc. reader abbreviations should disallow white-space between
> the abbreviation symbol and the <s-exp> to which it's applied by the reader.
> 
>   (a 'b c) => (a (quote b) c)
> 
>   (a ' b c) => (a b c) ; warning, unbound quote.
> 
> As given that lists are constructed from [car cdr] pairs, the expression:
> 
>   (a ' b c) :: [a [' [b [c ]]]] => [a [[quote [b [c ]] ] :: (a (quote b c))
> 
> Which is wrong; as opposed to being literally lexically assoc with <s-exp>:
> 
>   (a 'b c) :: [a ['b [c ]]] => [a [[quote [b ]] [c ]]] :: (a (quote b) c)
> 
> Which I know is irrelevant, but just attempting to explain the basis of my
> thoughts, as odd or misguided as they may be.

By extending my possibly odd notion of things, if prior to eval:

  '<s-exp> :: {quote <s-exp>] => (quote <s-exp>)
  '<white-space> :: {quote  } =>

was performed by the reader, then possibly by extension:

   #'<s-exp> :: {remove <s-exp>} =>
   #'<white-space> :: {remove  } =>

Possibly thereby preserving Aubrey Jaffer's #; extension?

In summary, thanks for considering these thoughts regardless of the
conclusion reached.