This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 110 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 110 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
On 03/13/2013 07:22 PM, David A. Wheeler wrote:
It does, but even if I modified head I would not expect it to do what you want. A ". x" by itself returns just "x" in other cases, so for consistency, adding a rule about "." in head would still create an additional (...).
Ah right - I see.
But that's okay, because I think what you want is: define-library ! example grid ! export make rows cols ref each rename(put! set!) ! import scheme(base) ! . ! <* ! ;stuff *>
I don't think I'd have thought of this, but it's good to know it's possible.
This makes the most sense to me, I'll put it in the draft revision I'm writing.Or, just: define-library . <* example grid export make rows cols ref each rename(put! set!) import scheme(base) ;stuff *>
If constructs like this are common: ! . ! <* ... *> Then we could argue that "\\" after "." is reasonable, e.g.: ! . \\ <* ... *> However, I do worry that the sequence ". \\ <*" completely fails the "it's obvious what it means" test.
Yes I agree, and given the stuff above I don't think we need it. Thanks, Dave