[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Matthias Felleisen <matthias@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> I am sorry to see that there is such a huge misunderstanding in our own
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?