Hi Alex, as we discussed recently, I have tried how Common Lisp handles dot and it allows dot as part of a symbol name.
In PicoLisp, the dot is special and reader gives a bit "inconsistent" results: : . -> NIL : .2 -> NIL : .a -> NIL : (1 .2) -> (1 . 2) : (1 .hi) -> (1 . hi) : (1.2) -> (1) : You were right that a picolisp number cannot just start with a dot. In Common Lisp, I can do: CL-USER> (defun .b (x) (1+ x)) B CL-USER> (.b 2) 3 CL-USER> 'a.b A.B CL-USER> a.b EVAL: variable A.B has no value [Condition of type SYSTEM::SIMPLE-UNBOUND-VARIABLE] CL-USER> '(a . b) (A . B) CL-USER> (length '(a . b)) LENGTH: A proper list must not end with B [Condition of type SIMPLE-TYPE-ERROR] CL-USER> '(a.b) (A.B) CL-USER> (length '(a.b)) 1 CL-USER> .23 0.23 CL-USER> '(1.(2.3)) (1 (2.3)) CL-USER> '(1 .(2.3)) (1 2.3) CL-USER> '(1 .(2 .3)) (1 2 0.3) CL-USER> '(1 .(2 . 3)) (1 2 . 3) In other words, the dot inside a list must be on its own (separated by whitespace) to have the "cons" meaning. I think that Common Lisp behaviour "makes more sense" in this regard and is "less restrictive". Regards, Tomas -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe
