[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-hackers] [Scheme-reports] R7RS-small draft ratified by Stee
From: |
John Cowan |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-hackers] [Scheme-reports] R7RS-small draft ratified by Steering Committee |
Date: |
Fri, 11 Jul 2014 21:18:43 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) |
Sanel Zukan scripsit:
> Is this means that we are no longer allowed to write and support
> someting like:
>
> (define (1+x x) (+ 1 x))
>
> ?
If you are an implementer, you certainly can provide such a procedure.
If you are a user, and you care about standards conformance,
you should choose a different identifier, as 1+x has never been a
standards-conformant identifier under *any* version of the Scheme
standard. However, most Scheme implementations will accept 1+x as a
valid identifier.
--
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan address@hidden
In computer science, we stand on each other's feet. --Brian K. Reid
Re: [Chicken-hackers] [Scheme-reports] R7RS-small draft ratified by Steering Committee, John Boyle, 2014/07/11
Re: [Chicken-hackers] [Chicken-users] R7RS-small draft ratified by Steering Committee, Peter Bex, 2014/07/12