From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?=) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: r6rs incompatibilities Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 18:43:45 +0200 Message-ID: <87pr0ipq9q.fsf@gnu.org> References: <983244.37247.qm@web37906.mail.mud.yahoo.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1274892245 32741 80.91.229.12 (26 May 2010 16:44:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 16:44:05 +0000 (UTC) To: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed May 26 18:44:04 2010 connect(): No such file or directory Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OHJi7-00022r-GT for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 26 May 2010 18:44:03 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37349 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OHJi6-0003ar-VD for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 26 May 2010 12:44:02 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=36552 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OHJi2-0003ZJ-Rw for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 May 2010 12:43:59 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OHJi1-00050X-I8 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 May 2010 12:43:58 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:34296) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OHJi1-00050Q-7V for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 May 2010 12:43:57 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OHJhz-0001u8-2t for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 May 2010 18:43:55 +0200 Original-Received: from acces.bordeaux.inria.fr ([193.50.110.5]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 26 May 2010 18:43:55 +0200 Original-Received: from ludo by acces.bordeaux.inria.fr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 26 May 2010 18:43:55 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ connect(): No such file or directory Original-Lines: 33 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: acces.bordeaux.inria.fr X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 7 Prairial an 218 de la =?iso-8859-1?Q?R=E9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0xEA52ECF4 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 83C4 F8E5 10A3 3B4C 5BEA D15D 77DD 95E2 EA52 ECF4 X-OS: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:b6OOyKVsku9ePUZR9qOciD8+lOw= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:10377 Archived-At: Hi, Andy Wingo writes: > On Wed 26 May 2010 15:02, Julian Graham writes: > >>>> We could make this more general, as the r7 committees are wont to do: if >>>> #! is followed by whitespace or /, then read as a block comment; >>>> otherwise read one token. In our case, we would read #!foo as #:foo. I >>>> don't think this change would affect anyone. What do you think? >>> >>> Note that there are a couple of other #! constructs being considered for >>> scheme 7, for example to control case folding. It seems more or less >>> sensible. Perhaps we should read these as directives, and not as datums >>> at all. >>> >>> There is also the possibility of introducing a reader option for this >>> behavior. >> >> Any chance we could go with my (admittedly sloppy) approach (or >> something equally as quick) in the short term, and then, as they say >> in the 'biz, "iterate?" The above sounds sweet, but it seems like >> it'd make more sense to tackle those things post-2.0. > > Heh, sure. But don't make it return SCM_UNSPECIFIED, please; make it > treat #!r6rs as a comment. See > http://www.r6rs.org/final/html/r6rs/r6rs-Z-H-7.html#node_sec_4.2.3. Functions that read comments all return ‘SCM_UNSPECIFIED’, which allows them to be distinguished by the main loop. Thanks, Ludo’.