Alan Watson wrote: > I don't follow you. The general principle would suggest that +inf.0 and > +nan.0 be case sensitive, yet they are case insensitive in the R6RS > (according to the text). That is surely an irregularity. Or are you > ignoring the text?
The formal grammar in chapter 4 of the R6RS says +inf.0 and +nan.0 are case-sensitive. R6RS section 4.2.8 contradicts this by saying "Case is not significant in external representations of number objects." As I have stated previously, my opinion is that the formal grammar governs; any prose that contradicts the formal grammar is an error. The inconsistency of the R6RS is obvious here. That does not mean the case-sensitivity of +inf.0 and +nan.0 is an irregularity when judged by the general principles you stated. It means you would *create* an irregularity (when judged by those principles) if you were to resolve the inconsistency in favor of the prose instead of the formal grammar. For reference, the two general principles you stated were: > ...the R6RS is case insensitive for things that are specified by the > R5RS... > ...the R6RS is case sensitive for things that are not specified by the > R5RS... On another matter: > > As for why all the character names ended up being > > case-sensitive, I don't know. > > The case-sensitivity of #\space and \#newline in the R6RS make it > dangerous to attempt to read R5RS data using the R6RS read procedure. The case-sensitivity of symbols in the R6RS makes it dangerous to attempt to read R5RS data using the R6RS read procedure. Case-sensitivity of #\space and #\newline in the R6RS does not add a whole lot to the danger that's already there. Will _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
