On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:22 PM, Shriram Krishnamurthi <s...@cs.brown.edu>
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.
--
sam th
sa...@ccs.neu.edu
_________________________________________________
For list-related administrative tasks:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
