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.
I've just put up a new draft, with the following changes: - I've fixed the examples to be clearer and to include all of the weird or peculiar cases. I've also added some examples of invalid input. - I've included the formal specification, based on what Al* Petrofsky suggested. (I'd like to note at this point my distaste for using such cumbersome tools as BNF-style grammars for describing Lisp syntax... I attribute the complexity of the change to that, not to the complexity of this SRFI; the change to the recursive-descent parser shows how simple it really is.) - I've included Scheme48's reader, and I've fixed the slight bug in the #; definition which caused the semicolon to not be immediately consumed. Regarding Aubrey Jaffer's use of #; for a different purpose: since the use of #; for S-expression comments is already well-established, and since it has already been decided upon for R6RS, I think it is better for this SRFI to stick with #; and for some other character sequence to be selected to substitute for SCM's somewhat obscure use of #;. On the matter of nested comments: I am pretty firmly set on the current way S-expression comments work. Since it's an extremely specialized case, since it has a very simple logical explanation, and since the current way things work is a very simple addition to a traditional Lisp recursive-descent S-expression parser, I'm inclined to stay with the status quo unless the suggested alternative can be shown to be as simple, in terms of logical explanation & recursive-descent parser, as the status quo.