Re: Read Macro Characters and Packages
- From: "Tel A." <abrahamson.j@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 4 Jun 2006 12:01:14 -0700
Mikko Heikelä wrote:
On Sun, 4 Jun 2006, Pascal Costanza wrote:
Tel A. wrote:
What is the cannonical method of "exporting" read macro characters fromI don't have the impression that changing the read table occurs so often that
packages?
there is a "canonical" approach for this. My guess would be that exporting
the read macro function, or maybe a function that performs the modification
of the read table, is better because it avoids surprises.
The latter is at least what CLSQL does for its sql syntax. It exports
functions enable-sql-reader-syntax, disable-sql-reader-syntax, and a
couple of other related functions. See the documentation for more
information on these and their "local" counterparts.
-Mikko
That's what I was leaning towards as well. I would expect that users
would want to explicitly have control to modify the read table. I just
wondered if perhaps the import itself was considered explicit enough.
Thank you
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Read Macro Characters and Packages
- From: R. Mattes
- Re: Read Macro Characters and Packages
- From: Harald Hanche-Olsen
- Re: Read Macro Characters and Packages
- References:
- Read Macro Characters and Packages
- From: Tel A.
- Re: Read Macro Characters and Packages
- From: Pascal Costanza
- Re: Read Macro Characters and Packages
- From: Mikko Heikelä
- Read Macro Characters and Packages
- Prev by Date: Re: Relative merits of Lisp-1 vs. Lisp-2?
- Next by Date: Re: Relative merits of Lisp-1 vs. Lisp-2?
- Previous by thread: Re: Read Macro Characters and Packages
- Next by thread: Re: Read Macro Characters and Packages
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|