Forum: Public Review
References: Loosemore's public review comment #5
#b, #o, #x, #r reader syntax
(sections 184.108.40.206 to 220.127.116.11, pages 2-30..2-31)
Edit history: 21 Dec 1992, Version 1 by Loosemore
Status: Proposal CONSEQUENCES-UNDEFINED passed (8+2)-1 on
letter ballot 93-302.
Is #ofoobar valid syntax? In other words, what happens if the
object following #b, #o, #x, or #r doesn't have the syntax of
a rational in the given radix?
Clarify that the consequences are undefined if the token following
#b, #o, #x, or #r does not have the syntax of a rational in the given
At least some implementations signal an error. Other implementations
apparently just rebind *READ-BASE* and call READ recursively.
Lucid, CMU CL, and AKCL all signal an error. WCL reads #ofoobar
as the symbol FOOBAR.
Cost to implementors:
Cost to users:
None, since the behavior already differs among implementations.
Being explicitly vague is better than being implicitly vague.
Adding one sentence to each of the four referenced sections.