On 3/2/13, David A. Wheeler <dwhee...@dwheeler.com> wrote: > Should #!curly-infix stop #!sweet? > > Originally it did. I implemented "#!curly-infix" and found that our > enable-curly-infix didn't disable, so #!curly-infix didn't, and so I changed > the SRFI to match. Now I'm not sure I did the right thing. > > You could argue that #!curly-infix should NOT stop #!sweet, since #!sweet > embeds curly-infix, and this means that #!curly-infix is "safe" to > arbitrarily add.
SRFI-sweet says that implementations MAY have sweet-expressions enabled by default. That actually argues for having a #!no-sweet, and having #!curly-infix disable sweet expressions but retaining curly-infix. Dunno. Either seems workable to me. > > You could argue that #!curly-infix SHOULD stop #!sweet, so that you can > switch modes. > > Thoughts? > > --- 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 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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
