[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-hackers] [CR] Make keywords distinct from symbols

From: Mario Domenech Goulart
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] [CR] Make keywords distinct from symbols
Date: Fri, 17 May 2019 23:53:08 +0200

On Fri, 17 May 2019 21:44:12 +0200 Peter Bex <address@hidden> wrote:

> On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 10:30:14PM +0200, Peter Bex wrote:
>> Some of the defining forms reject keywords now, but there may be some
>> we missed, and by making them completely distinct we fix these problems
>> for good. For the vast majority of the code out there this is an
>> unimportant change. Code which relies on symbol? returning #t for keywords
>> will run into trouble (but is usually easy to fix by adding another cond
>> clause for keyword?, which will happily be backwards compatible to older
>> CHICKENs). There may be other obscure uses of keywords that will fail, but
>> I can't really think of many.
> So far nobody has bothered to reply here or on the ticket at all.
> It will be two weeks after next Monday (the 20th).
> As our process document at
> says that if two weeks pass without comments, it should be assumed nobody
> cares enough or has a problem with the change.
> I've heard from Felix on IRC, he said he's worried we're changing too
> much at once in 5.1.  Personally, I think if we make this change in a
> later version it'll be more frustrating for users, because we're already
> changing how keywords behave (no plists, cannot be used as identifiers
> anymore).  Making keywords and symbols distinct types later means we'll
> have two such changes.
> To sum up, we could:
> 1) Not make this change at all
> 2) Do it anyway in 5.1
> 3) Do it in some later version (but how long do we wait?)
> What do the other hackers think?  Please, speak up!

I'd vote for 2.

All the best.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]