[R6RS] R6RS Unicode SRFI controversial issues
Sun Jun 19 10:05:00 EDT 2005
Here's the redux of my positions:
- I'm for:
> 2) adopt the here-string syntax and allow newlines in the normal
> string syntax
(I wouldn't fight for here-strings, though.)
- I'm against any form of \<newline> special, specifically if it has
- I'm for Kent's suggestion to require characters to be delimited.
- Let's either replace #\newline by #\linefeed or not introduce a
redundant character name. The presence of both would be confusing
if they mean the same thing.
- I agree with Marc that "octal is dead." But if we don't support it
for characters, let's not support it for strings.
- I prefer Marc's fixed-length scalar-value notation in strings to
Matthew's variable-length notation, but am worried about the
proliferation of different gadgets for doing the same thing.
Ditching octal escapes would be a first step. As I argued before, I
prefer Gambit-C's (early?) method of letting me write a
Scheme-syntax exact-number literal to denote a Unicode scalar value;
for strings, we'd merely need to terminate.
- I'm against adding scsh's #< syntax.
I'm for all the rest of Marc's original post, specifically, the case
of character names, #t, #f, and not decoding escapes before lexical
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, V?lkerverst?ndigung und ?berhaupt blabla
More information about the R6RS