Re: [Scheme-reports] Is <bytevector> missed out from the list of pattern datum?

[Yuichi Nishiwaki <yuichi.nishiwaki@x>]

Hi Alex,

2013/12/1 Alex Shinn <alexshinn@x>:
> Hi Yuichi,
>
> On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Yuichi Nishiwaki
> <yuichi.nishiwaki@x> wrote:
>>
>> Hi.
>>
>> Looking over the r7rs draft, I found <bytevector> is missed out from
>> <pattern datum> definition at 7.1.5. Transformers.
>
>
> This is not an oversight.  <bytevector>, along with <string>, is
> a <simple datum>, and <pattern datum> are only defined on
> <compound datum>s.
>

You maybe made some misreading (or I misread your mail). I'm just
talking about <pattern datum>, but not <pattern>. If <bytevector> is a
<simple datum> as you said should it be added to the list just like below?

<pattern datum> -> <string>
  | <character>
  | <boolean>
  | <number>
  | <bytevector>   # <- me!

-- Yuichi Nishiwaki

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