[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Scheme-reports] Scheme r7rs syntax described by ABNF
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
> ;;; - 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
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.
Scheme-reports mailing list