After a short discussion on #lisp the current behaviour was seen as a bug; a line-comment should _only_ be terminated by a newline, and not by a terminating character as well. Eg. for #?rx( ... # (a test) hello) the current version would return an error about "hello" being an unknown variable. Regards, Phil $ diff -u read.lisp.orig read.lisp --- read.lisp.orig 2012-09-28 07:56:57.201746774 +0200 +++ read.lisp 2012-09-28 07:57:32.989790049 +0200 @@ -462,8 +462,7 @@ ;; or *TERM-CHAR* (read-while (lambda (char) - (and (char/= char #\Newline) - (char/= char *term-char*)))) + (char/= char #\Newline))) (when (char= (peek-char*) #\Newline) (read-char*)) (cond ((not (digit-char-p (peek-char*)
Hi, But what about #?x/[a-z]#blabla/ with your patch applied? I'd expect CL-INTERPOL to interpret the second slash as the end of the regular expression. Cheers, Edi. On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Philipp Marek <philipp@marek.priv.at> wrote:
After a short discussion on #lisp the current behaviour was seen as a bug; a line-comment should _only_ be terminated by a newline, and not by a terminating character as well.
Eg. for
#?rx( ... # (a test) hello)
the current version would return an error about "hello" being an unknown variable.
Regards,
Phil
$ diff -u read.lisp.orig read.lisp --- read.lisp.orig 2012-09-28 07:56:57.201746774 +0200 +++ read.lisp 2012-09-28 07:57:32.989790049 +0200 @@ -462,8 +462,7 @@ ;; or *TERM-CHAR* (read-while (lambda (char) - (and (char/= char #\Newline) - (char/= char *term-char*)))) + (char/= char #\Newline))) (when (char= (peek-char*) #\Newline) (read-char*)) (cond ((not (digit-char-p (peek-char*)
_______________________________________________ cl-interpol-devel site list cl-interpol-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/cl-interpol-devel
participants (2)
-
Edi Weitz -
Philipp Marek