On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 3:25 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:22 PM, Shriram Krishnamurthi <[email protected]> > wrote: >> You know, it's not inconceivable such a thing could happen if you had >> a PURELY syntactic *interpreter*. >> >> I remember when I got to Brown, they were using one of those weirdo >> Scheme interpreters, and had come to conclusions about the semantics >> of Scheme on the basis of its behavior. Things like you could run >> >> ('(lambda (x) x) 3) >> >> and it would evaluate to 3 because of the way the interpreter was structured. >> >> Now if Aaron ran one of those to test his code... > > I'm pretty sure that this is also how the original Lisp interpreter > from McCarthy's paper worked.
If so, it was a bug on my part. :P > -- > sam th > [email protected] > _________________________________________________ > For list-related administrative tasks: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev > -- Jay McCarthy <[email protected]> Assistant Professor / Brigham Young University http://faculty.cs.byu.edu/~jay "The glory of God is Intelligence" - D&C 93 _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
