[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Chicken-hackers] [Scheme-reports] R7RS-small draft ratified by Stee

From: Sanel Zukan
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] [Scheme-reports] R7RS-small draft ratified by Steering Committee
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 23:23:58 +0200


Is this means that we are no longer allowed to write and support
someting like:

(define (1+x x) (+ 1 x))



On 07/11/14,John Cowan wrote:

> 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.

reply via email to

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