Re: Any macro for inserting math "normally"
- From: rpw3@xxxxxxxx (Rob Warnock)
- Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 06:18:14 -0500
szergling <senatorZergling@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
+---------------
| rpw3@xxxxxxxx (Rob Warnock) wrote:
| > I suspect Sussman may have been using his own personal
| > experimental/extended version of Scheme in that talk.
|
| Right. He doesn't need an experimental/extended Scheme though, quite a
| few vanilla Schemes seem to have it (though I have never seen code
| written that way). I initially tested it on a Scheme (probably
| mzscheme and elk), and when it worked, I didn't check the standard...
+---------------
Uh... AFAIK, MzScheme never supported "structured" LAMBDAs or
DEFINEs, e.g.:
mz> (define ((foo x) y)
(+ x y))
define: bad identifier at: (foo x) in: (define ((foo x) y) (+ x y))
mz>
But even a very old Elk-3.0 seems to:
elk> (define ((foo x) y)
(+ x y))
foo
elk> (foo 37)
#[compound value]
elk> ((foo 37) 3)
40
elk>
-Rob
-----
Rob Warnock <rpw3@xxxxxxxx>
627 26th Avenue <URL:http://rpw3.org/>
San Mateo, CA 94403 (650)572-2607
.
- References:
- Re: Any macro for inserting math "normally"
- From: szergling
- Re: Any macro for inserting math "normally"
- From: Rob Warnock
- Re: Any macro for inserting math "normally"
- From: szergling
- Re: Any macro for inserting math "normally"
- Prev by Date: Re: cl-s3: so far, so amazing
- Next by Date: Re: Opposite of ~^ FORMAT Directive
- Previous by thread: Re: Any macro for inserting math "normally"
- Next by thread: Re: Any macro for inserting math "normally"
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|