[plt-scheme] Re: Scheme workshop survey

Not bad.  I would have expected you to just sandbox the expression and
run it.  Surely that's not hard to do in Gambit, and then you could
have accepted the various call/cc responses you're going to get, too.

On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 2:48 PM, Marc Feeley <feeley at iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
>
> On 17-Oct-08, at 3:07 PM, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote:
>
>> Dear Marc,
>>
>> I am deeply disappointed to find out that the survey's designer does
>> not know Scheme.  Apparently
>>
>>  (car '((a b c) x y z))
>>
>> does NOT evaluate to
>>
>>  '(a b c)
>>
>> (It apparently also doesn't evaluate to
>>
>> (cons 'a (cons 'b (cons 'c empty)))
>>
>> or to various other expressions that use call/cc, but I can excuse
>> those.  The first error is unacceptable.)
>
> Wow!  I did not know you were a reductionist...  I thought those folks died
> off a long time ago.  But hey there is still hope for you... you could come
> to the next Scheme workshop to try to convince the rest of the Scheme
> community you are right (or be assimilated).  Can I count on you?
>
> Marc
>
> P.S. I did handle the whitespace, case-sensitivity, square-bracket and
> dotted pair issues so that the following is accepted: [  A  b . (   C)]
>
>