Re: brackets

[Felix S Klock II <pnkfelix at MIT dot EDU>]

> Chris <chris@bitmead.com> writes:
> 
> > I can't see the argument that opt 1 is anything but really simple
> > and easy to understand.
> > 
> > Whether it is convenient in terms of  compatibility is another question.
> > But IMHO, the nice thing about Scheme is that only '(' and ')' and
> > I guess quotes are special. Everything else is available for tokens.
> 
> Per's description of the status quo (option 1) was not quite complete.
> The status quo is that square brackets have been advertised (in the
> NEWS) file, as being synonymous with parens, but they aren't quite
> synonymous.  That's what makes the status quo nearly as complex as
> option 3.
> 
> I think the simplicity you describe would require removing the partial
> support for square brackets as parens.
> 
> -- 
> Bruce R. Lewis  <brlewis@[(if (brl-related? message)
>                               "users.sourceforge.net"
>                               "alum.mit.edu")]>  http://brl.sourceforge.net/


When Per said "status quo" for option 1, I interpreted that as meaning
"status quo for R5RS Scheme", not "status quo for Kawa"

I believe "[..] == (..)" approach that you associate with option 1 was
already given a seperate slot, as option *2*

So I'd argue that option 1 really is the simplest of the lot.

-Felix