[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: arithmetic issues
| From: "Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk" <qrczak@xxxxxxxxxx>
| Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 03:45:41 +0200
| Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
| >>> It is an explanation of why your appeal to tradition is
| >>> ill-founded; the tradition actually points the opposite way.
| >> There is no tradition in not providing a read syntax for "error
| >> objects".
| > Really? Can you give me some pointers to the Lisp systems which
| > do provide read syntax for all the error objects they have?
| Could you show an object which does not have read syntax in Lisp
| *because* it's an error object?
In R5RS the eof-object has no read-syntax. If it did, then calls to
READ would be unable to distinguish between an actual end of file and
an eof object written in a file.