[plt-scheme] call-by-value vs. call-by-name?

On Jan 28, 2008 3:21 PM, Matthias Felleisen <matthias at ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
> P.S. I don't know what Noel means with PLT like theorems about
> programs. PLT -- as in us -- likes theorems about programming
> languages, because it sells papers in certain circles. And it is a
> reasonable thing to do.

When I said PLT (extract below) I was referring to the programming
language theory field of research, not the PLT group who produce PLT
Scheme.  Sorry about the confusion -- it was a silly thing to do on
this list!

---
1. Every research community has its own definition of what makes an
acceptable result.  In PLT I would say the mainstream answer is that
an acceptable result is what can be proved about a program.  From
proofs follow types and Haskell has the most expressive type system of
the major FP languages.
---

N.