Re: [Scheme-reports] Boolean hemlines

[Peter Bex <Peter.Bex@x>]

On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 12:09:16AM -0400, John Cowan wrote:
> Alan Watson scripsit:
> > A long time ago, some people made the decision that #t/#f were in
> > some sense better than #!true/#!false. More recently, the WG1 have
> > made a different decision that #true/#false are in some sense better
> > than #t/#f.
> 
> The cases aren't really comparable.  #!true and #!false were removed from
> the language; #t and #f aren't being removed.
> 
> > This decision is not without cost. If an R7RS Scheme writes a boolean
> > datum as #true or #false, it likely cannot be read by a R4RS, R5RS,
> > or R6RS Scheme. It is unrealistic and probably undesirable to require
> > perfect compatibility between iterations of Scheme, but changing the
> > spelling a fundamental data is perhaps unexpected. The WG1 needs to
> > decide if this cost is acceptable, and if not either revert their
> > decision to allow #true/#false or require write to produce #t/#f.
> 
> I think that's a quality of implementation issue.  Currently Chibi is
> the only Scheme that accepts #true and #false, and it always prints
> #t and #f.

I think this #true and #false is a completely gratuitous change, and if
anyone has even the slightest problem with it, it should go.  It has
almost zero benefit.

Cheers,
Peter
-- 
http://sjamaan.ath.cx
--
"The process of preparing programs for a digital computer
 is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically
 and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic
 experience much like composing poetry or music."
							-- Donald Knuth

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