[r6rs-discuss] @ should be a valid identifier

[Derick Eddington]

On Wed, 2008-06-25 at 01:09 -0400, John Cowan wrote:
> Derick Eddington scripsit:
> 
> > Following my comments below, I cannot see a reason why @ should not have
> > been allowed to be an identifier.  Is there a good reason @ should not
> > be a valid identifier?
> 
> Yes, there is.
> 
> If @ were permitted as the initial character of an identifier, then it
> would be ambiguous whether {, at foo} and {,@ foo} were unquotes or
> splicing unquotes.

Ah.  That is a good reason.  Thank you.  Now what to do about
R6RS-ifying SXML...

-- 
: Derick
----------------------------------------------------------------