Re: [Scheme-reports] Scheme r7rs syntax described by ABNF
Peter Bex 18 Jan 2013 17:17 UTC
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 01:36:53AM +0900, ノートン ジョーセフ ウェイ ン wrote:
>
> Alex -
>
> I added the following TODO item to my local copy and also added one new item as a placeholder.
>
> ;;;
> ;;; TODO:
> ;;; - Fix definition of peculiar-identifier and
> ;;; pattern-peculiar-identifier not to include "+i", "-i", and
> ;;; <infnan>.
Most Schemes tend to attempt a numeric parse of a datum and if it fails
fall back to assuming it must be a symbol. This isn't required by the
standard, so you're right, the identifier definition should disallow
these.
> ;;; - Review definitions to check if syntactically correct but
> ;;; semantically incorrect numbers can be avoided (e.g. "#e0/0",
> ;;; "#e+1/0", "#e-1/0", "#e"<infnan>).
I think this was discussed before. In any case, IMHO these numbers
should not cause a hard read-time parse error but some sort of runtime
or compile-time error upon conversion to an internal numeric
representation.
I'm not sure the standard should forbid a read-time parse error, but I
think it shouldn't try to enforce semantic rules at the syntactic level.
Cheers,
Peter
--
http://sjamaan.ath.cx
_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports