what does "(define (p) (p))" mean?
in [Lisp]
|
From: Javier on 15 Sep 2006 15:51 Chris Barts ha escrito: > I know you're being facetious, but I would welcome a more diverse group of > languages. Logo, for example... While languages like Python, Perl, might have some similarities to Lisp, Scheme is a direct dialect of Lisp, like CL. And this group is named comp.lang.LISP, not comp.lang.COMMON-LISP, so I think Scheme is apropiate here.
From: Pascal Bourguignon on 15 Sep 2006 18:37 "Javier" <javuchi(a)gmail.com> writes: > Chris Barts ha escrito: >> I know you're being facetious, but I would welcome a more diverse group of >> languages. Logo, for example... > > While languages like Python, Perl, might have some similarities to > Lisp, Scheme is a direct dialect of Lisp, like CL. > And this group is named comp.lang.LISP, not comp.lang.COMMON-LISP, so I > think Scheme is apropiate here. Indeed, while it's not a pure scheme specific question, in which case cls is much more indicated. -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail? __Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
From: Holger Schauer on 18 Sep 2006 07:32 On 4762 September 1993, Javier wrote: > Chris Barts ha escrito: >> I know you're being facetious, but I would welcome a more diverse group of >> languages. Logo, for example... > While languages like Python, Perl, might have some similarities to > Lisp, Scheme is a direct dialect of Lisp, like CL. > And this group is named comp.lang.LISP, not comp.lang.COMMON-LISP, so I > think Scheme is apropiate here. It's not, for the simple reason that usenet is structured around themes and comp.lang.scheme exists, i.e., there is a *more* appropriate group for Scheme. There's probably a reason why it's comp.lang.scheme and not comp.lang.lisp.scheme. EOT for me, Holger -- --- http://www.coling.uni-freiburg.de/~schauer/ --- Fachbegriffe der Informatik - Einfach erkl?rt 109: Fernschach GUI auf 386/8 MB (nach Frank Klemm)
From: Karl A. Krueger on 20 Sep 2006 01:22 Javier <javuchi(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Chris Barts ha escrito: >> I know you're being facetious, but I would welcome a more diverse group of >> languages. Logo, for example... > > While languages like Python, Perl, might have some similarities to > Lisp, Scheme is a direct dialect of Lisp, like CL. Indeed, Scheme is an ancestor of CL. Lexical scope is a big win. -- Karl A. Krueger <kkrueger(a)example.edu> { s/example/whoi/ }
From: Thomas A. Russ on 20 Sep 2006 11:59
"Karl A. Krueger" <kkrueger(a)example.edu> writes: > Javier <javuchi(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Chris Barts ha escrito: > >> I know you're being facetious, but I would welcome a more diverse group of > >> languages. Logo, for example... > > > > While languages like Python, Perl, might have some similarities to > > Lisp, Scheme is a direct dialect of Lisp, like CL. > > Indeed, Scheme is an ancestor of CL. Lexical scope is a big win. Actually, Scheme is more of a sibling or cousin of Common Lisp. From the initial 1984 edition of Guy Steele's _Common Lisp: The Language_, p.1: "Common Lisp is a new dialect of Lisp, a successor to MacLisp, influenced strongly by Zetalisp and to some extent by Scheme and Interlisp." Zetalisp (a.k.a. Lisp Machine Lisp) already had lexical scoping. -- Thomas A. Russ, USC/Information Sciences Institute |