[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: A proposal for reserved read-syntax characters
"John.Cowan" <jcowan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> That would bar the use of these characters in identifiers, and
> allow them to be used by any Scheme system that has redefinable
> read syntax for whatever purpose.
That Scheme does not allow read syntax modification is, in my
opinion, a good thing. I'm not sure I've ever seen a really useful
read table modification that would have needed a special
character. Indeed, the special characters usually only lead to
I would advocate against reserving too many characters. The
currently reserved ones suffice - and that only includes the curly
braces after the syntax modification of this SRFI/R6RS.
Your list also includes quite a few characters which I
definitively would like to allow in identifiers, if we allow
Unicode characters at all (These include the reversed question
mark, among others).
 It might seem that this would preclude portable Scheme
programs because the accepted character set is "implementation
defined", unless the standard defines one (UTF-8 would be
natural choice, as it allows for ASCII-only to work just as
well). The same problem exists for string constants, though.
((email . "forcer@xxxxxxxxx") (www . "http://www.forcix.cx/")
(gpg . "1024D/028AF63C") (irc . "nick forcer on IRCnet"))