[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: H, E, S, B, O, D, X

To: JAR%ai.ai.mit.edu@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA, rrrs-authors%mc.lcs.mit.edu@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Re: H, E, S, B, O, D, X
From: David Bartley <Bartley%ti-csl.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Date: Fri 23 May 86 10:06:06-CDT
Cc: Bartley%ti-csl.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <"860522111800.2.jar@AI"@JOE-LOUIS.LCS.MIT.EDU>

We have implemented the number output formats in PC Scheme.  I like
the idea of spelling out the keywords and won't "vote" against it, but
there are two troublesome aspects:

(1) We already have a product out that supports the abbreviated style,
so we'd have to grandfather it.  That's always a minor pain.

(2) My experience is that not one programmer in ten can spell both
EXPRESSED and SUPPRESSED correctly (sorry about that!).  What should
NUMBER->STRING do with EXPRESED or SUPRESSED?  [Of course, there are
plenty of other opportunities for misspellings to trip one up!]

Seriously, I recommend that we retain the single letter abbreviations
as an option if we switch to full names for these keywords.

Regards,
David Bartley
-------

References:
- H, E, S, B, O, D, X
  - From: Jonathan A Rees <JAR@MIT-AI.ARPA>

Prev by Date: Notes about (^ revised 3) report
Next by Date: Re: LOAD
Prev by thread: H, E, S, B, O, D, X
Next by thread: LOAD
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread