Re: [Scheme-reports] editorial awkwardness for syntax-rules pattern-matching

[John Cowan <cowan@x>]

Per Bothner scripsit:

> Much clearer to write:
> 
>    P is of the form (P_1 . . . P_k P_e ellipsis P_k+1 ... P_k+l)
>    where E is a proper list of n elements, the first
>    k of which match P_1 through P_k , respectively, whose
>    next n−k-l elements each match P_e, whose remaining
>    l elements match P_k+1 through P_k+l

I don't see where the aditional clarity comes in; also, having both 1 and l
in a formula is asking for trouble.

-- 
John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        cowan@x
One time I called in to the central system and started working on a big
thick 'sed' and 'awk' heavy duty data bashing script.  One of the geologists
came by, looked over my shoulder and said 'Oh, that happens to me too.
Try hanging up and phoning in again.'  --Beverly Erlebacher

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