[R6RS] comment #46 (LF should not be the only line separator)
William D Clinger
will at ccs.neu.edu
Fri Dec 15 14:25:58 EST 2006
> Just a historical note: It used to appear in section 3.2.6, but our
> response to ticket #9 elided it. It should have appeared in the
> grammar of the 5.91 draft, but got omitted due to an editorial error
> on my part.
You're right; it does appear in section 3.2.6 of the
5.91 draft. I just missed it.
This looks like an opportunity for me to repeat my
complaint that splitting the formal syntax across
so many subsections, interspersed with prose, makes
the formal syntax harder to study.
More information about the R6RS