[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Issue: READ-CASE-SENSITIVITY (Version 2)
- To: Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Subject: Re: Issue: READ-CASE-SENSITIVITY (Version 2)
- From: peck@Sun.COM
- Date: Thu, 23 Mar 89 18:14:53 PST
- Cc: jeff%aiai.edinburgh.ac.uk@NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK
- Cc: CL-Cleanup@sail.stanford.edu
- In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 23 Mar 89 18:56:00 -0500; <890323185605.7.KMP@BOBOLINK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM> .
>(2) the lack of need to add CHAR-INVERT-CASE (which I don't think is very
> useful outside of this context).
I guess i don't see how this is useful even in this context.
Is this a Symbolics'ism?
If :preserve is an option, why would someone want :INVERT?
dOES SOMEONE THINK :invert IS EASIER TO TYPE THAN eSCAPES or vERTICAL-bARS?
dO YOU HAVE files WRITTEN WITH :invert?
How about throwing out :INVERT *and* CHAR-INVERT-CASE?
Which of READTABLE-KEYWORDS or READTABLE-FUNCTIONS would you prefer then?
[given a sufficiently powerful Emacs that can escape the chars before
passing them to the Lisp reader, does any of this matter to X3J13?]
While we are busy trying to be KSR33 compatible, the rest of the world
may zoom on by. The Japanese won't be interested in much of this code.
Oops, sorry, that is not a cleanup issue.