You mean,
(eq? 'a 'A) => #f
and
(let ((FOO 3)) foo) => 3
Right?
It is an interesting idea, but what should happen when I
import Xlib, which defines distinctive constants XK_A and XK_a?
--shiro
From: John Cowan <cowan_at_ccil.org>
Subject: Re: [r6rs-discuss] Scheme should not be changed to be case sensitive
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 13:23:03 -0500
> Shiro Kawai scripsit:
>
> > Symbol case folding is not only a matter of the reader but
> > also affects the writer if we want to guarantee write-read
> > invariance.
>
> It occurs to me that a possibility not yet addressed is to provide
> symbol case-folding but identifier case-folding. That is, Scheme
> should fold identifiers in the interpreter or compiler, rather than
> folding the names of symbols at run time. That would, I believe,
> satisfy the code-backward-compatibility issue.
>
> (I'm still in favor of case-sensitive identifiers *and* symbols.)
>
> --
> There is no real going back. Though I John Cowan
> may come to the Shire, it will not seem cowan_at_ccil.org
> the same; for I shall not be the same. http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
> I am wounded with knife, sting, and tooth,
> and a long burden. Where shall I find rest? --Frodo
>
Received on Tue Nov 21 2006 - 02:56:56 UTC