[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

new draft

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 62 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 62 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

I've just put up a new draft, with the following changes:

  - I've fixed the examples to be clearer and to include all of the
    weird or peculiar cases.  I've also added some examples of invalid
  - I've included the formal specification, based on what Al* Petrofsky
    suggested.  (I'd like to note at this point my distaste for using
    such cumbersome tools as BNF-style grammars for describing Lisp
    syntax...  I attribute the complexity of the change to that, not to
    the complexity of this SRFI; the change to the recursive-descent
    parser shows how simple it really is.)
  - I've included Scheme48's reader, and I've fixed the slight bug in
    the #; definition which caused the semicolon to not be immediately

Regarding Aubrey Jaffer's use of #; for a different purpose: since the
use of #; for S-expression comments is already well-established, and
since it has already been decided upon for R6RS, I think it is better
for this SRFI to stick with #; and for some other character sequence to
be selected to substitute for SCM's somewhat obscure use of #;.

On the matter of nested comments: I am pretty firmly set on the current
way S-expression comments work.  Since it's an extremely specialized
case, since it has a very simple logical explanation, and since the
current way things work is a very simple addition to a traditional Lisp
recursive-descent S-expression parser, I'm inclined to stay with the
status quo unless the suggested alternative can be shown to be as
simple, in terms of logical explanation & recursive-descent parser, as
the status quo.