Re: [bug #31680] R6RS string literal intraline whitespace removal

Re: [bug #31680] R6RS string literal intraline whitespace removal

[Göran Weinholt]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1105 bytes --]

Andy Wingo <INVALID.NOREPLY@gnu.org> writes:
> Update of bug #31680 (project guile):
>
>                   Status:                    None => Fixed                  
>              Open/Closed:                    Open => Closed                 
>
>     _______________________________________________________
>
> Follow-up Comment #9:
>
> Fixed in git.  You have to enable a reader option:
>
> (read-enable 'hungry-eol-escapes)

I'm wondering if it wouldn't make more sense to have these reader
options by associated with each port. Maybe I'm missing something, but
if one enables hungry-eol-escapes, wouldn't there be some problems when
reading files that assume hungry-eol-escapes is disabled?

A benefit of having the reader options kept on a port-by-port basis is
that the #!r6rs datum can enable whatever options are needed to properly
read R6RS code (r6rs-hex-escapes, hungry-eol-escapes, are there more?)
without interfering with non-R6RS code.

Regards,

-- 
Göran Weinholt <goran@weinholt.se>
"I AM LEARNING HANDSHAKES FROM AROUND THE WORLD!!!" -- POKEY THE PENGUIN

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 835 bytes --]

Re: [bug #31680] R6RS string literal intraline whitespace removal

[Andy Wingo]

On Tue 08 Feb 2011 00:13, Göran Weinholt <goran@weinholt.se> writes:

> I'm wondering if it wouldn't make more sense to have these reader
> options by associated with each port.

Probably, yes.  Would be a larger refactor, though.

> if one enables hungry-eol-escapes, wouldn't there be some problems when
> reading files that assume hungry-eol-escapes is disabled?

Yes, though there are no files like that within Guile itself.  If you
want it in your code, you can safely turn it on globally.  Not a perfect
solution, but oh well.

Cheers,

Andy
-- 
http://wingolog.org/

Re: [bug #31680] R6RS string literal intraline whitespace removal

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hello,

Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com> writes:

> On Tue 08 Feb 2011 00:13, Göran Weinholt <goran@weinholt.se> writes:
>
>> I'm wondering if it wouldn't make more sense to have these reader
>> options by associated with each port.
>
> Probably, yes.  Would be a larger refactor, though.

I think ports and reader syntax are orthogonal.

Instead I’m in favor of multiple ‘read’ procedures and using the
‘current-reader’ fluid to make sure the current reader is inherited.

Thanks,
Ludo’.