#

## Issue GET-MACRO-CHARACTER-READTABLE Writeup

    Status: Passed, Jan 89 X3J13
    Forum: Cleanup
    Issue: 	GET-MACRO-CHARACTER-READTABLE

    References:  CLtL p.361: COPY-READTABLE, SET-SYNTAX-FROM-CHAR, and
                             GET-MACRO-CHARACTER
                 CLtL p.364: GET-DISPATCH-MACRO-CHARACTER,
                 CLtL p.378: Example in middle of page

    Category:    CLARIFICATION/CHANGE

    Edit history:  Version 1, 16-Nov-88, by JonL
                   Version 2,  8-Dec-88, by Masinter (fix typo)
    		Version 3, 11-Feb-89, as amended Jan 89 X3J13

    Problem description:

    The 'readtable' argument to GET-DISPATCH-MACRO-CHARACTER and to
    GET-MACRO-CHARACTER must be of type READTABLE, without mention of
    what happens when NIL is supplied. This may have been simply
    an oversight, since it makes more sense for it to refer to values from
    the standard readtable.  Both COPY-READTABLE and SET-SYNTAX-FROM-CHAR
    explicitly say that a NIL in the 'from-readtable' argument refers to the
    standard readtable.  Also, an example in the middle of the page, CLtL
    p.378, supplies a NIL to GET-MACRO-CHARACTER, and is clearly intending
    to access the standard readtable values.

    Proposal (GET-MACRO-CHARACTER-READTABLE:NIL-STANDARD)

    Specify that a NIL readtable argument to GET-DISPATCH-MACRO-CHARACTER
    and to GET-MACRO-CHARACTER mean the same thing it does for COPY-READTABLE,
    and SET-SYNTAX-FROM-CHAR; namely a reference to the standard readtable.
    Thus (GET-MACRO-CHARACTER <char> NIL) would be equivalent to
    (GET-MACRO-CHARACTER <char> (COPY-READTABLE)), but without consing.

    Rationale:

    Probably was the original intent; somebody wants it; also see "Esthetics".

    Current practice:

    Symbolics and Xerox have already implemented the proposal; Lucid, VAXLISP,
    and KCL stuck to the more rigid interpretation.

    Cost to Implementors:

    Trivial.

    Cost to Users:

    None.

    Cost of non-adoption:

    Minor worry about porting between implementations that support the
    generalization and those that don't; minor worry about consing when
    calling (COPY-READTABLE) to get at standard readtable semantics.

    Performance impact:

    See "Cost of non-adoption".

    Benefits:

    See "Cost of non-adoption".

    Esthetics:

    Increases parallel design among similar readtable functions.

    Discussion:

    This question was raised in the Common Lisp mailing last summer:
        Date: 19 Jul 88 13:35
        Subject: Question about readtable null arguments
        From: quiroz%cs.rochester:EDU:Xerox
        To: common-lisp%sail.stanford:EDU:Xerox

    This issue passed at the Jan 89 X3J13 meeting. The only
    difference between version 2 and 3 was to remove the
    test case because of problems of "function equivalence":

    If "same-function-p" compared functions:

    (let ((standard-rt (copy-readtable))
          (chars '(#\* #\= #\| #\A #\  #\( #\# #\1)))
      ;; Test Case 1
      (dolist (char chars)
        (assert (same-function-p (get-macro-character char nil)
                    (get-macro-character char standard-rt))
                () "Lose on character ~C" char))
      ;; Test Case 2
      (dolist (char chars)
        (assert (same-function-p (get-dispatch-macro-character #\# char nil)
                    (get-dispatch-macro-character #\# char standard-rt))
                () "Lose on #\# dispatch character ~C" char))
      ;; Test Case 3
      (assert (same-function-p (get-dispatch-macro-character #\# #\A nil)
                  (get-dispatch-macro-character #\# #\a nil))
              () "Lose on #\# dispatch character ~C" char)
     )

Copyright 1996-2001, Xanalys Inc. All rights reserved.