[r6rs-discuss] Case sensitivity
Guillermo J. Rozas
gjr6765 at gmail.com
Sat Feb 21 16:02:04 EST 2009
Yes, absolutely, but why should we distinguish on the bases of 'case'
and not 'font'? They are different glyphs after all.
I doubt seriously that anyone would argue that a 'Times Roman' lower-
'a' would be different from a 'Helvetica' lower-case 'a'.
It _is_ an arbitrary choice, and Scheme, like many Lisp dialects,
had traditionally been case insensitive. R6RS decided to be
And #!case-fold and #!no-case-fold is just punting the issue.
Now, I have to search for those if I want to read a piece of code and
On Feb 21, 2009, at 12:52 PM, Shiro Kawai wrote:
> From: "Guillermo J. Rozas" <gjr6765 at gmail.com>
> Subject: [r6rs-discuss] Case sensitivity
> Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2009 11:35:05 -0800
>> But the real reason is that some people have C/Java 'envy' and have
>> always had case sensitive
>> implementations, and have been trying to foist this on the rest for
>> ages (ever since R2RS).
> I'm not sure it is 'envy', but I started programming in C before
> coming to Lisp/Scheme, and case-insensitivity did struck me weird.
> But what's more perplexing is the debate about it. My native
> language doesn't have a concept of "case" at all. Thus, to me,
> 'A' and 'a' are different characters, that happened to be
> exchangeable in certain occasions. Like 'あ' (U+3042) and
> 'ア' (U+30a2)---no Japanese would argue to fold these two.
> I suspect cultural issue in background is not negligible.
> Anyways, I frequently implement DSLs on top of Scheme, and some
> of such DSLs 'compiles' into case-sensitive languages. Writing
> case-sensitive symbols with escaped notation clutters the code
> horribly and decreases the value of DSLs significantly. Thus
> I welcomed R6RS's choice of case sensitivity.
> (BTW, now we can switch them by #!case-fold and #!no-case-fold,
> why are we discussing about this?)
More information about the r6rs-discuss