Re: [racket-users] Self evaluating Racket Interpreter

> On May 2, 2017, at 12:01 AM, circularba...@gmail.com wrote: > > I am somewhat reluctant to use structures as I want to keep the interpreter > as minimal as possible. Also, I'm not familiar enough with the semantics of > frames to implement it in interpreter.rkt. > > With regards to mcons

Re: [racket-users] Self evaluating Racket Interpreter

On Tuesday, May 2, 2017 at 2:03:23 AM UTC+8, Jens Axel Søgaard wrote: > I recommend you change your representation to structures. > > > See new answer: > > > http://stackoverflow.com/a/43723966/23567 > > > > /Jens Axel > > > > > > > 2017-05-01 19:03 GMT+02:00 : >

Re: [racket-users] Self evaluating Racket Interpreter

Matthias helpfully pointed me at this  http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/matthias/HtDP2e/part_two.html#%28part._i2-3%29, which made me reflect a bit more and I agree now it is fair to say that `(1 2 3) is short for (list 1 2 3). Perhaps a reflexive reaction from letting myself get confused about

Re: [racket-users] Self evaluating Racket Interpreter

Hijacking this thread a little, but a pet peeve: ‘(1 2 3) is not short for (list 1 2 3), it just happens to evaluate to that… (let ([x 0]) (list x x)) -> (list 0 0) (let ([x 0]) ‘(x x)) -> (list ‘x ‘x) Perhaps the reader should implement #l(, which inserts an explicit `list` at the beginning

Re: [racket-users] Self evaluating Racket Interpreter

I recommend you change your representation to structures. See new answer: http://stackoverflow.com/a/43723966/23567 /Jens Axel 2017-05-01 19:03 GMT+02:00 : > I posted this question on stackoverflow but have not found an answer yet. >

Re: [racket-users] Self evaluating Racket Interpreter

'(1 2 3) is short for (list 1 2 3) which is short for (cons 1 (cons 2 (cons 3 null)) which is different from (mcons 1 (mcons 2 (mcons 3 null))) I hope this helps On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 1:03 PM, wrote: > I posted this question on stackoverflow but have not found an