On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 8:49 PM, Marc Feeley feeley@iro.umontreal.ca wrote:
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".
Well, I used to use Bigloo a lot, but I haven't done a formal survey. My standard compatibility prelude defines pp and pretty-print to be identical across systems in just the same way it also defines call/cc for those systems that implement only call-with-current-continuation. So no, it's not a big deal, I just thought I'd mention it.
david rush