Re: LISP code example matching an abstract construct

"Juan R." <juanrgonzaleza@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
[...]
Once i understood this (and see that some LISPers think similar) i can
see that probably my original proposal for CanonCode (transformation of
CanonML documents somewhat as XSLT is for transformation of XML) could
work in a minimalist approach.

(X ...)

and

(... X ...)

both mean the same X command, whereas in CL only (X ...) can be
interpreted that way.

Have a look at scheme. This is a question of Lisp-1 vs. Lisp-2.

In scheme, X is interpreted the same in both places (but it would
still be called in first position, and just passed as argument in the
other positions; it's still (verb complement...)).


--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/

PLEASE NOTE: Some quantum physics theories suggest that when the
consumer is not directly observing this product, it may cease to
exist or will exist only in a vague and undetermined state.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: New algorithm for short signatures
    ... Henrick Hellström wrote: ... >halves of the input block in such way that the input could not be chosen ... transformation:= f; state what the requirements for f ... are; prove that your scheme is secure if f meets those requirements; ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: SBCL is now faster than Java, as fast as Ocaml, and getting better
    ... and the intent is to perform the transformation that, for example, ... What you want is more or less what the syntax-rules pattern matching in ... Scheme does, no? ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)