Re: bad-idea-p?

Ken Tilton ha escrito:

Pillsy wrote:
Ken Tilton wrote:

What is not open to question is the need for consistency.

Also: why the heck is it ATOM and NULL instead of ATOMP and NULLP?

Well, I kinda like the present-at-the-creation feeling I get from those
inconsistencies. meanwhile, zero-p? Nah, we need to borrow back
something else from scheme: zero?


What about TooEasyP?

Opps wait, this is about inconsistencies on inconsistencies.