[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Issue: READ-CASE-SENSITIVITY (Version 1)
- To: David N Gray <Gray@DSG.csc.ti.com>, Jeff Dalton <email@example.com>
- Subject: Re: Issue: READ-CASE-SENSITIVITY (Version 1)
- From: masinter.pa@Xerox.COM
- Date: 14 Mar 89 14:17 PST
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
- In-reply-to: David N Gray <Gray@DSG.csc.ti.com>'s message of Thu, 9 Mar 89 18:01:27 CST
I have 15 replies to version 1, but no version 2.
Personally, I think adding a character translation table is overkill if all
that's wanted is case sensitive or no, and the performance cost unwieldy.
"Gilding the lilly."
Why not just (READTABLE-CASE <readtable>) that accepts/returns :UPCASE (the
default) or :DOWNCASE.
Note that the setting of the READTABLE-CASE in *READTABLE* should affect
printing: if (READTABLE-CASE *READTABLE*) is :DOWNCASE, then *PRINT-CASE*
is ignored; symbols should be printed with the same case as their internal
This is effectively what Medley does; it was necessary to support
readtables with a case sensitive "bit" so that the same environment could
simultaneously support Interlisp (which is case sensitive) and Common Lisp.
If this is going to go anywhere, we'll need a version 2. If you want to
proceed with just the READTABLE-CHARACTER-TRANSLATION, I won't squawk too
loudly (but I think I would vote against all of the proposals, even the one
I outline above, on the grounds that they are 'unnecessary' complications.)