<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 5:04 PM, Peter van Rooijen <<a href="mailto:peter@vanrooijen.com">peter@vanrooijen.com</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d">On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 20:42:46 +0100, Eliot Miranda<br>
<<a href="mailto:eliot.miranda@gmail.com">eliot.miranda@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 12:09 PM, Paolo Bonzini <<a href="mailto:bonzini@gnu.org">bonzini@gnu.org</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
</div><div class="Ih2E3d">>> Somewhat drifting from the original topic, but I'll note that the ANSI<br>
>> standard does not have symbols in array without a prefixed # (the only<br>
>> "bare" keywords accepted there are true/false/nil and they signify the<br>
>> three objects).<br>
><br>
><br>
> Which is something I'd change.<br>
<br>
</div>So you would have #(hunoz hukairz) be a valid literal Array with 2 symbols<br>
in it, correct?</blockquote><div><br>Yes. <br> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">> Which dialects don't support the non-ANSI behaviour?<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d">
<br>
</div>I would assume all dialects interpret that form as I think you would like<br>
it. I certainly don't recall seeing any other behavior.<br>
<br>
BTW, ANSI says in #(hunoz hukairz) it is undefined what the Array elements<br>
are. Why it didn't say they are symbols, I don't know.</blockquote><div><br>Why leave undefined something common to all dialects? Anyone have recollection of the discussion?<br><br>I think this points to an important feature of a new standard, that of including design rationale for as many decisions as possible.<br>
</div></div><br>