[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Issue: EXTENSIONS-POSITION (version 1)
- To: chapman%aitg.DEC@decwrl.dec.com
- Subject: Re: Issue: EXTENSIONS-POSITION (version 1)
- From: masinter.pa@Xerox.COM
- Date: 31 Jan 89 11:18 PST
- Cc: cl-editorial@sail.stanford.edu, cl-compiler@sail.stanford.edu
- In-reply-to: your message of 10 Jan 89 14:30
The compiler issue SHARP-COMMA-CONFUSION seems to imply that
implementations "could continue to provide #, as an extension". However, is
such an extension legal? Can't legal common lisp programs redefine #, if #,
isn't in the language? If they can, wouldn't it disallow having #, be an
extension?
I'm discussing this under EXTENSIONS-POSITION since the proposal itself for
#, didn't propose making it explicit in the standard that #, "was allowed
as an extension".