On Wed, 2008-06-25 at 01:09 -0400, John Cowan wrote:
> Derick Eddington scripsit:
>
> > Following my comments below, I cannot see a reason why @ should not have
> > been allowed to be an identifier. Is there a good reason @ should not
> > be a valid identifier?
>
> Yes, there is.
>
> If @ were permitted as the initial character of an identifier, then it
> would be ambiguous whether {,@foo} and {,@ foo} were unquotes or
> splicing unquotes.
Ah. That is a good reason. Thank you. Now what to do about
R6RS-ifying SXML...
--
: Derick
----------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
r6rs-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
