From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Neil Jerram Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: [Guile-commits] GNU Guile branch, syncase-in-boot-9, updated. e3c5df539640a36eb1493f581087d54a4714f337 Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2009 23:35:22 +0100 Message-ID: <87prdm1cyd.fsf@arudy.ossau.uklinux.net> References: <8763fip2sf.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1243982146 11585 80.91.229.12 (2 Jun 2009 22:35:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 22:35:46 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?= , guile-devel@gnu.org To: Andy Wingo Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jun 03 00:35:42 2009 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 4.50) id 1MBca6-0001yM-Bi for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 03 Jun 2009 00:35:42 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40133 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MBca5-00050A-8i for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:35:41 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MBcZz-0004yu-43 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:35:35 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MBcZt-0004pc-Vw for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:35:34 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=46443 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MBcZt-0004pQ-S8 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:35:29 -0400 Original-Received: from mail3.uklinux.net ([80.84.72.33]:49387) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MBcZp-0002UM-GC; Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:35:25 -0400 Original-Received: from arudy (host86-152-99-133.range86-152.btcentralplus.com [86.152.99.133]) by mail3.uklinux.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79C9F1F7EDE; Tue, 2 Jun 2009 23:35:23 +0100 (BST) Original-Received: from arudy.ossau.uklinux.net (arudy [127.0.0.1]) by arudy (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEE9C38021; Tue, 2 Jun 2009 23:35:22 +0100 (BST) In-Reply-To: (Andy Wingo's message of "Sun\, 31 May 2009 14\:14\:01 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4-2.6 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:8593 Archived-At: Andy Wingo writes: >>> * module/ice-9/boot-9.scm: Remove #' read-hash extension, which actually >>> didn't do anything at all. It's been there since 1997, but no Guile >>> code I've ever seen uses it, and it conflicts with #'x => (syntax x) >>> from modern Scheme. >> >> I find this point questionable. Do we really need to break this >> functionality? It would be nicer if we could both keep >> `read-hash-extend' and the functionality you want. What do you think? > > `read-hash-extend' is still there. This just removed the #' > read-hash-extension, which was the identity extension: #'foo == foo. > > `read-hash-extend' overrides any core hash forms, so this extension > prevented #'foo == (syntax foo). It would be easy for an affected reader > to add this particular extension back, though. I don't think we need to worry much about preserving the #' read-hash extension, however: (1) Doesn't #'x => (syntax x) need to apply only in the lexical RHS of a syntax-case syntax transformer? Perhaps then we could implement this meaning of #'x only in this limited scope, and retain the older meaning in other scopes? (2) We should of course mention the removal of the old #' in NEWS, and as part of that entry it would be good to say in detail how "It would be easy for an affected reader to add this particular extension back". (Which I assume just means providing the necessary (read-hash-extend ...) incantation.) Regards, Neil