Saul Tobin <saul.james.to...@gmail.com> writes: > My idea is to treat that as equivalent to 2,3/8 -> '(2 (3 . 8)) and let the > function figure out how to interpret it.
I don't want functions to behave in absurd manners when given Scheme expressions. Reinterpreting Scheme expressions to have different nesting in order to process input that does not actually correspond to what it is supposed to express... Nope. We don't want that kind of obfuscation in order to accidentally end up with the thing naïvely intended by the user but not reflected properly in the input. -- David Kastrup
