[plt-scheme] Re: Scheme workshop survey

Don't you think the problem ultimately comes down to the limits of  
natural language? After all, the question was posed in English. In  
"The Little Schemer" there is a chapter (9?) where a great deal of  
emphasis is placed on the differing typefaces used (in that book) for  
atoms and bits of Scheme code. By introducing this convention, TLS  
is, in effect, using an artificial language to circumvent some of the  
difficulties of ordinary English (even as used to discuss languages  
like Scheme).

I would have answered (a b c), but I appreciate the arguments for  
using '(a b c) and, to me, it seems that both are a kind of compromise.


"Interaction is the mind-body problem
of computing." --Philip  L. Wadler

http://www.gwoodhouse.com
http://GregWoodhouse.ImageKind.com






On Oct 19, 2008, at 2:45 PM, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 4:31 PM, Richard Cleis <rcleis at me.com> wrote:
>> Does the following progression make sense, by ordinary standards of
>> Ameringlish?
>>
>> (car '((a b c) x y z)) is '(a b c)
>>
>> The value of (car '((a b c) x y z)) is (a b c)
>
> Not to me.
>
>   (a b c)
>
> is an expression, not a value.  It may also be the print
> representation chosen by some particular implementation for some
> particular value, but then so is
>
>   /---+---+---\
>   | a | b | c |
>   \---+---+---/
>
> (Do you see my point?)
>
> Shriram

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/attachments/20081019/770280be/attachment.html>