P.S. I think assuming an "unlimited unread" would work and keep the
implementation reasonably "simple".  While RnRS doesn't have unlimited
unread, most production Schemes in practice support unlimited unread
on at least some of their ports.  Plus unlimited unread can be
emulated if you don't have to worry about compatibility with future
accesses on the port:

define (make-unreadable-port port)
! cons '() port

define (unreadable-port-read-char port)
! if (null? (car port))
! !  read-char $ cdr port
! !  let <* c $ car (car port) *>
! !  ! set-car! port $ cdr (car port)
! !  ! c

define (unreadable-port-unread-char port c)
! set-car! port $ cons c (car port)
! '()

Sincerely,
AmkG

On 6/13/13, Alan Manuel Gloria <almkg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Mark has just sent another e-mail on the SRFI-110 mailinglist:
>
> http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-110/mail-archive/msg00186.html
>
> Basically, our options (I think....) are:
>
> 1.  Drop ANTLR and use a simpler BNF.
>
> 2.  Create a "simpler" third implementation that calls to an SRFI-105
> implementation.
>
> Other things we could do, based on Mark's suggestions?
>
> On 6/5/13, David A. Wheeler <dwhee...@dwheeler.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 3 Jun 2013 19:40:26 +0800, Alan Manuel Gloria
>> <almkg...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Mark H Weaver (one of the Guile devs who is open to implementing our
>>> notation) complains that the ANTLR code is too complex.
>>>
>>> Is there anything we can do to make it simpler?
>>
>> Thanks for posting; I'd definitely like to hear others' thoughts.
>> I'm confident that we can make it simpler if we put our heads together.
>>
>> I'll probably be inactive for the next few days, due to
>> pressing work and visiting family.
>>
>> --- David A. Wheeler
>>
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:

Build for Windows Store.

http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Readable-discuss mailing list
Readable-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/readable-discuss

Reply via email to