Re: Re: case-sensitivity of special symbols in SXML

> It seems that the only thing we can do is to minimize surprises by
> maintaining case-consistency: if I ever wrote a symbol or an
> identifier in a particular case, I try to keep that particular case
> and capitalization all throughout the code and the comments.

Understood, though this presents at least two practical problems that I
think are good arguments for fixing the case of "*TOP*" and related
symbols:

1. The SSAX packaging for the Scheme implementation that I use most
   often (MzScheme 209) has switched to emitting lowercase "*top*" (and
   related SXML symbols).  This means that, in case-sensitive code using
   the SSAX library, I actually need to refer to "*top*" rather than
   "*TOP*", which is not consistent with your sensible convention of
   using the same case everywhere for the symbol.

   (Additionally, my code using lowercase "*top*" will probably then
   break when I move to MzScheme 299, which *is* case-sensitive by
   default.  And the code is also (increasingly) non-portable to many
   other Scheme implementations, which I think Kirill has noted seem to
   be moving to case-sensitive by default, if there are not already.)

2. I store some XML files in SXML notation, and otherwise use SXML as an
   interchange format between processes (including different Scheme
   implementations), using Scheme "read" and "write".  Since many Scheme
   implementations are case-sensitive, the case of "*TOP*" and friends
   in the SXML file is important.

-- 
                                             http://www.neilvandyke.org/


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl