Re: Release 1.6 critical TODO items.

[Marius Vollmer]

Neil Jerram <address@hidden> writes:

> >>>>> "Rob" == Rob Browning <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>     Rob> Martin Grabmueller <address@hidden> writes:
>
>     >> IRIC, the problem with this was that after writing out/reading in, the
>     >> gensym symbols would not be unique anymore.  After looking for a
>     >> solution for that, we came into a larger discussion about read/write
>     >> invariance, cyclic data structures, symbol->string conversions etc.

Yep, that wasn't very productive...

>     Rob> Your code seems like it's at least a fairly substantial improvement
>     Rob> over what we have now, especially for the cases where gensym is being
>     Rob> used inside macro expansions to avoid unintential shadowing.
> 
>     Rob> Any reason I shouldn't just test and include this fix in 1.5/1.7?
> 
>     Rob> Eventually fixing the write/read problem seems like it will require
>     Rob> something fancier and/or some compromises.
> 
> Why do gensym symbols need a re-readable print syntax anyway?

It would be good if they had one, but I agree that it is better to
have unreadable, uninterned symbols than not to have uninterned
symbols.

> I don't think they even need names.  We could just print them,
> whenever we have to, as `#<symbol 03df4d>' or such like.

Yep.