[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Scheme-reports] [scheme-reports-wg1] Post-plebiscite issue #2: additional character names

On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 2:49 AM, John Cowan <cowan@x> wrote:

Alexey writes:

>  [...] Perhaps change
>   "Implementations are free to add other names." to "Implementations
>   are free to add other names, so long as those names are not of the
>   form x[a-fA-F0-9]+ , which would conflict with hex escapes."

I believe Alexey's resolution is correct.  Does any WG1 member disagree?
Does any member of the Scheme community disagree?  Silence gives consent.

I see this is an editorial clarification of an implicit truth - we
gave license to add escapes, but not to remove from the
existing set of escapes.


Scheme-reports mailing list