perhaps I've missed something ...
John Clements
(20 Jan 2000 22:21 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Lars Thomas Hansen
(20 Jan 2000 22:38 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Shriram Krishnamurthi
(20 Jan 2000 22:52 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Lars Thomas Hansen
(20 Jan 2000 23:02 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
John Clements
(20 Jan 2000 22:58 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Lars Thomas Hansen
(20 Jan 2000 23:05 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
John Clements
(20 Jan 2000 23:12 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
sperber@xxxxxx
(21 Jan 2000 07:38 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Lars Thomas Hansen
(20 Jan 2000 22:44 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
John Clements
(20 Jan 2000 23:09 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Per Bothner
(20 Jan 2000 23:01 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Matthias Felleisen
(20 Jan 2000 23:18 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Per Bothner
(20 Jan 2000 23:55 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Matthias Felleisen
(21 Jan 2000 01:04 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Per Bothner
(21 Jan 2000 01:49 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Matthias Felleisen
(21 Jan 2000 02:40 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
thi
(21 Jan 2000 09:58 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Per Bothner
(21 Jan 2000 18:36 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
sperber@xxxxxx
(22 Jan 2000 10:32 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Per Bothner
(23 Jan 2000 20:02 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Shriram Krishnamurthi
(23 Jan 2000 20:50 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Per Bothner
(23 Jan 2000 21:25 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
sperber@xxxxxx
(24 Jan 2000 07:30 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Michael Livshin
(24 Jan 2000 16:55 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
sperber@xxxxxx
(25 Jan 2000 07:43 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Michael Livshin
(25 Jan 2000 11:02 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ... sperber@xxxxxx (25 Jan 2000 11:31 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Matthias Felleisen
(25 Jan 2000 13:47 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
sperber@xxxxxx
(24 Jan 2000 07:29 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
John Clements
(20 Jan 2000 23:59 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Per Bothner
(21 Jan 2000 00:18 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Shriram Krishnamurthi
(21 Jan 2000 00:03 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Per Bothner
(21 Jan 2000 00:37 UTC)
|
Re: perhaps I've missed something ...
Shriram Krishnamurthi
(21 Jan 2000 08:39 UTC)
|
>>>>> "Michael" == Michael Livshin <xxxxxx@bigfoot.com> writes: Michael> xxxxxx@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de (Michael Sperber [Mr. Preprocessor]) writes: me> 1. what I, in my naivete about PL design, take "set!" to be? >> me> (set! <name> <value>) translates, in my mind, to: dear Scheme, please me> make it so that next time I say <name>, and <name> denotes the same Michael> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ me> thing as now, I get <value>. Michael> ^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> >> But this intuition is wrong Michael> I think you missed the now-underlined part. No, I didn't. What is the semantics of "denotes the same thing"? You're effectively saying, "Next time I ask for the same thing, give me something different." What does that mean? I understand what you mean, but it requires an explanation which is considerably more elaborate. That explanation in turn makes clear the difference. >> This is precisely the case students struggle with. Well, sorry. It's not their fault. -- Cheers =8-} Mike Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla