On 1-Jun-08, at 2:47 PM, David Rush wrote:
I can't help you here, but PP and PRETTY-PRINT are widely implemented and have expected meanings to those of us who regularly use multiple Scheme implementations, so I would suggest that you find a different name, anyway.
Is portability a real concern? According to the Snow extio package Bigloo and MIT-Scheme use "pp" for pretty-printing, and don't define "pretty-print". Nine other systems use the name "pretty-print", most of which don't define "pp". So "pretty-print" would appear to be more portable. Moreover, Gambit's "pp" would still pretty print, but with added labels. One drawback is that you could no longer do (for-each pp lst) because pp would be a special form. Of course (for-each pretty-print lst) would work.
Marc