On 7/8/12, David A. Wheeler <dwhee...@dwheeler.com> wrote: > Alan Manuel Gloria: >> This simplifies the spec, but makes the following wrong: >> >> ' foo bar >> ==> >> (quote foo bar) >> >> The more complicated current spec yields: >> >> ' foo bar >> ==> >> (quote (foo bar)) > > The proposal is sensible, and I agree that it simplifies the spec slightly. > But I think the "more complicated" current spec (based on the SFRI) is the > better choice. Here's why. > > Imagine a longer expression like this: > foo bar > .. spam eggs eggs eggs > .. spam eggs eggs eggs > > Under the current spec, you can quote the entire expression by adding > quote-space to the front of the first line, e.g.: > ' foo bar > .. spam eggs eggs eggs > .. spam eggs eggs eggs > > The same with comma, comma-at, or backquote. These kinds of transformations > are pretty common, so making them really easy to do seems like a good idea. > In addition, it means that it's really easy to *write* these expressions in > the first place. > > You're right that this means that it means that traditional abbreviations > like QUOTE will be handled differently than grouping, but that's already > true in traditional Lisp anyway. 'x is already really special - a list > suddenly appears, even though there are no ()s.
Okay, that seems fine to me. Sincerely, AmkG ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Readable-discuss mailing list Readable-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/readable-discuss
