I said: > > Once it's removed from the BNF, I think we need to make sure that the > > Scheme specifically checks for it and forbids it. That way, people won't > > accidentally use such constructs for now, and that'll make it easier to > > add later if indeed it's added later.
Alan Manuel Gloria: > I propose making it an explicit error in the BNF rather than just > making it an invalid sequence by implication of its absence. Okay, I'll do that. --- David A. Wheeler ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb _______________________________________________ Readable-discuss mailing list Readable-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/readable-discuss
