[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Issue: READ-CASE-SENSITIVITY (Version 4)
- To: Kent M Pitman <KMP@stony-brook.scrc.symbolics.com>
- Subject: Re: Issue: READ-CASE-SENSITIVITY (Version 4)
- From: Jeff Dalton <jeff%aiai.edinburgh.ac.uk@NSFnet-Relay.AC.UK>
- Date: Fri, 23 Jun 89 13:36:11 BST
- Cc: Moon@stony-brook.scrc.symbolics.com, email@example.com
- In-reply-to: Kent M Pitman's message of Thu, 22 Jun 89 17:04 EDT
> Mostly this still looks ok to me. I will certainly encourage Moon to
> vote Yes on it. But I do have a few comments which I think would both
> improve the presentation and would help us avoid confusions down the
> Date: Thu, 22 Jun 89 19:32:17 BST
> From: Jeff Dalton <jeff%aiai.edinburgh.ac.uk@NSFnet-Relay.AC.UK>
> Issue: READ-CASE-SENSITIVITY
> Proposal (READ-CASE-SENSITIVITY:READTABLE-KEYWORDS)
> The READTABLE-CASE of a readtable also has significance when
> printing. The case in which letters are printed is determined as
> (The behavior when *PRINT-CASE* is :CAPITALIZE is like :UPCASE for
> the first character and :DOWNCASE for the rest.)
> I think this parenthetic remark is more confusing than helpful.
I think you're right. When I try to read it closely, I find that
I'm confused, and since I wrote it that should count. It looks
like it might be trying to say something interesting when it
> For example, it only applies in the cases of READTABLE-CASE
> being :UPCASE or :DOWNCASE, right?
> Strictly, I think it is not necessary because the phrase "in the
> case specified by *PRINT-CASE*" means this.
> If you really feel the remark is needed, I suggest the
>  That is, :UPCASE means uppercase, :DOWNCASE means lowercase,
> and :CAPITALIZE means uppercase for the first character and
> lowercase for the rest of the characters.
I think I'll try just taking it out.
> Test Case:
> (let ((rt (copy-readtable nil)))
> #'(lambda (case)
> (setf (readtable-case rt) case)
> (read-from-string "Zebra"))
> '(:upcase :downcase :preserve :invert)))
> => (ZEBRA |zebra| |Zebra| |zEBRA|) ;as printed with the standard
> ;readtable and *print-case* :upcase
> This example is buggy, of course, because you need to bind
> *READTABLE*, not RT.
I must have made a mistake in editing at some point.
> It's also incomplete because it doesn't explain the interaction with
What I wanted to do in the test case was just to show what internal
symbol-name was obtained given a setting for the READTABLE-CASE.
Perhaps I should do that more explicitly by showing the value returned
by SYMBOL-NAME. But maybe I have to show the effect of *PRINT-ESCAPE*
too, which does happen in the current test case (though I think
what I have is now over-cautious.
> It would be better if we had a test case which at least did:
I'm a bit worried about running out of time. I'll try to send
something better out later today, but I'm not sure I'll have time
to do a full set of test cases.
Thanks for you comments. They are vary helpful.