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

Re: Formal spec; implementation; nesting

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 62 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 62 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

Taylor Campbell wrote:
> In response to all of the hubbub regarding nested S-expression
> comments, I have to wonder: how often do you write such nestings?
> Does it really make so much of a difference that you consider 'fixing'
> a slightly non-intuitive yet not very common use of S-expression
> comments more significant than fundamentally changing Scheme's syntax
> to be sensitive to whitespace tokens?  Is it really so significant as
> to warrant inhibition of simple recursive-descent S-expression
> parsers?

I don't think it's a huge problem, just somewhat counterintuitive, as I
explained to Al. Also, the bit about whitespace was a based on a simple
misunderstanding of Scheme lexical elements, already cleared up.
Bradd W. Szonye