Re: reading NaNs

[Alan Watson <a.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Alan Watson wrote:
> But "atomic" I don't mean "not a pair". I not quite sure how to define 
> it, but perhaps "something that can be finitely enumerated" gets close. 
> Perhaps "atomic" is not the best name for this property.
>
> Anyway, this property is shared by chars, fixnums, flonums, null, EOF 
> objects. These (with the understandable exception of EOF) have standard 
> read syntax. By extension, the bignums and derivaties, while not finite, 
> also have a read syntax.
>
> Anyway, NaNs clearly share this property, so I would suggest they have a 
> read syntax.

Hmm. Perhaps the property I am looking for that of is objects which are 
eqv? according to their *value* not their *location*. This includes 
booleans, characters, numbers, nulls, and symbols. All of these have 
read syntax.

Regards,

Alan
--
Dr Alan Watson
Centro de Radioastronomía y Astrofísica
Universidad Astronómico Nacional de México