[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
badly-readable code.

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[1] (These include the reversed question
mark, among others).

        -- Jorgen

[1] 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"))