[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: srfi-75@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: naming comments
- From: Alex Shinn <alexshinn@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 12:29:36 +0900
- Delivered-to: srfi-75@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=dlYg4koXGIGFI2JTW3AKooV+/YammmUW5siRfnmjuoi1Bmr94Svf2sk9ZJP3zzYD2xIRgeF5T8tbosq6tYSBospxzlkxlE9KdVA98sRp2v7fK1wOeKcMEMo1fdWKuqj6qcmlvV7K6FnyG4UVicFdF69b4YuArtBymlMIwTfmReM=
- Reply-to: Alex Shinn <alexshinn@xxxxxxxxx>
What is the rational behind #\rubout? The official name
in both ASCII and Unicode is "delete."
Comparing 20 major Scheme implementations we find the
#\del: 7 use as canonical, 2 allow as alias
#\delete: 2 use as canonical, 2 allow as alias
#\rubout: 5 use as canonical, 3 allow as alias
Note, not all Schemes have a representation of the delete char.
"Canonical" means if you type in an alias at the REPL it replies
with the canonical representation instead.
So it seems there's a slight existing majority in favor of #\del,
but given the official name either that or #\delete would seem
Also, as to the terms
both proper English and Unicode terminology suggest these be