Adding to guile curly-infix (SRFI 105), neoteric- & sweet-expressions

address them. Also, I'd be happy to help get these implemented as part of guile. We have a current implementation that builds on *top* of guile (by completely re-implementing the reader), but it'd far better to have these built-in. Thanks for your time! --- David A. Wheeler

Re: Adding to guile curly-infix (SRFI 105), neoteric- & sweet-expressions

language feature in > Guile-2.x. > And it's more convenient to do that if we make sweet-expression the SRFIs. Agreed. We'll see how it goes. --- David A. Wheeler

Re: Adding to guile curly-infix (SRFI 105), neoteric- & sweet-expressions

in* guile. > I think Nala Ginrut once posted a patch that would allow read to > optionally recognize braces as delimiters. I guess thats a starting > point? Yes, { and } as delimiters makes the rest much easier. --- David A. Wheeler

Will guile support R7RS terminating "equal?" in the presence of cycle?

ot; and "display" in the presence of cycles. Will guile support such changes? I worry that these new requirements on "equal?" will have such a high overhead that people won't do it. But perhaps those fear are misplaced. Thanks. --- David A. Wheeler

Re: Adding to guile curly-infix (SRFI 105), neoteric- & sweet-expressions

joining the SRFI-105 mailing list or the "readable-discuss" mailing lists, since the guile-devel list isn't really the right list for that. --- David A. Wheeler

Re: Will guile support R7RS terminating "equal?" in the presence of cycle?

ikely to be adopted. Scheme is rediculously non-portable due to its lack of a *standard* library system. If a standard for *that* could be widely adopted, many other portability problems would be drastically reduced. > But we all can dream... Indeed! --- David A. Wheeler

SRFI-105 (curly-infix-expressions) marker #!srfi-105 ... could guile live with that?

27;t know if that would be ardently rejected or possibly accepted by guilers. The rationale (below) discusses this. Anyway, I'd like to know if the #!srfi-105 marker would be acceptable to guile developers, and if not, what alternatives would be suggested. Thanks. --- David A. W

Re: SRFI-105 (curly-infix-expressions) marker #!srfi-105 ... could guile live with that?

the folding mode. This could by > something like .scmc (scheme-curly). True. We use .sscm for "sweet-scheme", for example. --- David A. Wheeler

Re: [PATCH] Per-port read options, reader directives, SRFI-105

So that's a case particularly worth checking (and it does). --- David A. Wheeler

Please join SRFI-110 (sweet-expression) mailing list if you're interested!

terested, please see the SRFI page and join its mailing list: http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-110/ The draft SRFI includes some comparisons to previous work, going all the way back to M-expressions. Thanks for your time! --- David A. Wheeler