Re: [Scheme-reports] inconsistent use of \| escape John Cowan (28 Sep 2013 08:28 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] inconsistent use of \| escape Alex Shinn (28 Sep 2013 08:51 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] inconsistent use of \| escape John Cowan (28 Sep 2013 22:23 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] inconsistent use of \| escape John Cowan (28 Sep 2013 09:10 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] inconsistent use of \| escape Jay Sulzberger (28 Sep 2013 18:28 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] inconsistent use of \| escape John Cowan (28 Sep 2013 19:46 UTC)

Re: [Scheme-reports] inconsistent use of \| escape Jay Sulzberger 28 Sep 2013 18:23 UTC


On Sat, 28 Sep 2013, John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org> wrote:

> Alex Shinn scripsit:
>
>> Unfortunately, when the formal syntax differs from the prose,
>> the formal syntax takes precedence.  Whatever the WG intentions
>> may have been, the community ratified a standard in which \|
>> is not a predefined escape sequence in strings.  Referring to old
>> ballots was fine during the process, but now can only serve for
>> historical interests and to dig up rationales.
>
> Unsurprisingly, I don't agree.  The prose has always taken precedence
> in my mind, and in fact I tend to forget about the formal syntax, which
> is undoubtedly why I forgot to update it.
>
>> Looking for additional discussion it looks like the most recent public
>> post was during the formal comments period:
>>
>> http://lists.scheme-reports.org/pipermail/scheme-reports/2013-January/003223.html
>
> That post and its followups obviously didn't notice the contradiction
> either: they were discussing the formal syntax in its local context,
> not in the context of the whole report.  (Nobody's fault, of course.)
>
>> Attention was specifically brought to this, and a fix was made retaining
>> the formal syntax, so I think it's difficult to go back on this now.
>
> If the point had been raised that "\|" contradicted the prose, then I
> agree that this post would matter; as things are, I again cannot agree
> that this post is definitive or even relevant.
>
> I think the only thing we can do in the errata is to point out the
> contradiction and say that implementers will have to decide on their
> own whether to support \| in strings or not.

I think it is better to make a decision one way or the other.

oo--JS.

>
> --
> Overhead, without any fuss, the stars were going out.
>        --Arthur C. Clarke, "The Nine Billion Names of God"
>                John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports