Re: Is there any way to have a string literal that is read "raw"

[Lennart Borgman]

Richard M. Stallman wrote:

> I would not dream of changing something as fundamental as string
> syntax for something as specific as filename handling, even if it were
> meant to be used on the GNU system.  And since it is merely for the
> sake of Windows, an unethical system that we aim to replace, the
> motive is even further from sufficient.
>  
Of course not. I just wondered if there were some other method for 
creating lisp objects than (read ..) that I had missed.

> Nothing important in the design of Emacs should be designed for the
> sake of Windows, because that would be giving Windows influence it
> should not have.
There are many roads to the goal. How can one be sure which step is the 
best without considering advantages and drawbacks with an open mind?