[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: #.
- From: cperdue@Sun.COM (Cris Perdue)
- Date: Fri, 24 Jun 88 18:17:23 PDT
- Cc: ELIOT@cs.umass.edu, Moon@stony-brook.scrc.symbolics.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
> Thus while #. could be viewed as an adequate escape mechanism, it certainly
> couldn't be part of a general interchange language.
I have no very strong objections to special syntax for hash tables.
The same argument for special syntax does apply to other objects
including pathnames (for which Lucid (+ others) have the #P syntax),
readtables, and random-states. Really, there is a need for users to
be able to define their own types, *including* syntax for reading them
in. Once I start thinking of user-defined syntax, #. starts looking
more attractive again.
- From: Jon L White <email@example.com>