[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Chicken-hackers] R7RS-small draft ratified by Steering Committee

From: John Cowan
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] R7RS-small draft ratified by Steering Committee
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 14:52:15 -0400
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

ceving scripsit:

> The new standard seems to ban Guile's 1+ operator. It must be quoted in 
> R7RS |1+|.

True.  Then again, it wasn't valid R5RS either, or R4RS or even R3RS;
R2RS was the only Scheme standard to explicitly allow it, almost thirty
years ago.

The theory of R7RS identifiers is that they can't have a prefix which
is a valid number.  In practice, many Schemes simply attempt to parse
an alphanumeric sequence as a number, and if that fails, accept it as
an identifier.

John Cowan        address@hidden
Consider the matter of Analytic Philosophy.  Dennett and Bennett are well-known.
Dennett rarely or never cites Bennett, so Bennett rarely or never cites Dennett.
There is also one Dummett.  By their works shall ye know them.  However, just as
no trinities have fourth persons (Zeppo Marx notwithstanding), Bummett is hardly
known by his works.  Indeed, Bummett does not exist.  It is part of the function
of this and other e-mail messages, therefore, to do what they can to create him.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]