[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: perhaps I've missed something ...

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 17 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 17 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

Matthias Felleisen <matthias@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> I am sorry to see that there is such a huge misunderstanding in our own
> community. 

Here we go again.  Do they teach condescending at Rice?

> 1. Levels of programmers aside, set! and set-field-of-something!  are two
>    different concepts:

Could you save pointing out the obvious to your beginning students,
instead of to someone who has been in the programming-languages field
as long as you have or longer?

>    The idea of reifying the environment and introducing an invalid modifier
>    on it doesn't change this. It only emphasizes it. 

At least for top-level environments, the two forms are equivalent.

>    If it weren't for set!, Scheme would be a perfect data-oriented language
>    on top of mathematics (and thus mathematical reasoning). 

And pray how is set! different from set-field-of-something! in this respect?
	--Per Bothner
per@xxxxxxxxxxx   http://www.bothner.com/~per/