[plt-dev] at-exp and whitespace

From: Robby Findler (robby at eecs.northwestern.edu)
Date: Fri Feb 27 09:29:22 EST 2009

FWIW I like the "simple uniform" aspect of the current setup. I was
just wondering if there would be a way to signal an error for [ case.


On 2/27/09, Eli Barzilay <eli at barzilay.org> wrote:
> JFYI, the reason I implemented it this way is that I was worried about
> what would happen if any whitespace is allows.  I was worried that
> something like this can be a common mistake:
>   (define foo "blah")
>   @text{ @foo @foo @foo
>          [but not another @foo] }
> The error will be reading this as:
>   (define foo "blah")
>   (text " " foo " " foo " " (foo but not another foo) " ")
> For a while, I considered allowing only spaces (not newlines), but the
> result is an awkward set of rules to parse @-forms, so I chose to go
> with the simple and uniform option.
> --
>           ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
>                   http://www.barzilay.org/                 Maze is Life!

Posted on the dev mailing list.