|
Re: complexity of mechanism
felix winkelmann
(12 Apr 2006 19:39 UTC)
|
|
Re: complexity of mechanism
Eli Barzilay
(12 Apr 2006 20:54 UTC)
|
|
Re: complexity of mechanism
felix winkelmann
(13 Apr 2006 06:43 UTC)
|
|
Re: complexity of mechanism
Eli Barzilay
(13 Apr 2006 07:07 UTC)
|
|
Re: complexity of mechanism
felix winkelmann
(13 Apr 2006 08:04 UTC)
|
|
Re: complexity of mechanism
Eli Barzilay
(13 Apr 2006 08:26 UTC)
|
|
Re: complexity of mechanism
felix winkelmann
(13 Apr 2006 09:44 UTC)
|
|
Re: complexity of mechanism
John Cowan
(13 Apr 2006 11:43 UTC)
|
|
Re: complexity of mechanism
John Cowan
(13 Apr 2006 11:52 UTC)
|
|
Re: complexity of mechanism
Eli Barzilay
(13 Apr 2006 12:58 UTC)
|
|
Re: complexity of mechanism
felix winkelmann
(13 Apr 2006 13:15 UTC)
|
|
Re: complexity of mechanism Eli Barzilay (13 Apr 2006 13:07 UTC)
|
|
Re: complexity of mechanism
feeley
(13 Apr 2006 14:07 UTC)
|
On Apr 13, felix winkelmann wrote:
> [...] (and a subsequent overcomplication of lamba-list processing).
Marc -- one relevant comment about the srfi: it seems like many
negative gut reactions to this srfi are because you used `lambda'
instead of a new name. It might help if you revise it to use a
different name. (If there's a good enough module system in place,
then it doesn't matter anyway, since you can have a module that will
provide the new-lambda as `lambda'.)
--
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://www.barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!