Re: [Chicken-users] need idea for read-syntax

[Category 5]

felix wrote:

> Ok, shall it be #{ ... }#, then?

Hmmn.  This isn't too bad for the statement-sequence case, where the {}
even suggest the block structure of a C function, but I don't think it
fits the typed-value case well at all (partly for the same reason).

I can see Peter's point, but I think the use cases of #[ ]# are
different enough from literal vector notation to avoid confusion.  (Then
again, I don't have any code that writes vectors as #[1 2 3].  =)

Actually I'd rather see the conflation of []/() disappear and have plain
[] used to represent vectors in Scheme, making them look less like
second-class citizens.  But that's a whole 'nother discussion.

--