Well, he's generous about it; here's what he had to say.


Begin forwarded message:

> From: Aaron Stump <aaron-st...@uiowa.edu>
> Date: November 16, 2010 5:58:42 PM PST
> To: John Clements <cleme...@brinckerhoff.org>
> Subject: Re: Q. about "Directly Reflective" paper
> Reply-To: ast...@cs.uiowa.edu
> Hi, John.
> I think you are right about this.  Lambda abstractions evaluate to 
> #procedures in Scheme R5RS, and so it is not possible to take a cdr or car of 
> one of these.  I have no idea why I wrote this (four years ago -- there was a 
> major lag between acceptance and publication at HOSC).  I will add a note to 
> my web page about this, and possibly upload a revised version of the paper 
> without this incorrect statement.
> Aaron
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 4:18 PM, John Clements <cleme...@brinckerhoff.org> 
> wrote:
> I'm reading your paper, "Directly Reflective Meta-Programming," and I got 
> stuck early on a remark of yours about Scheme:
> > A meta-programming language is scope safe (or hygienic) iff variables may 
> > not be captured or escape their scopes during computation. Dynamic 
> > variables in Emacs LISP and Common LISP are a good example of a violation 
> > of scope safety [30, 24]. Scheme R5RS’s macro language is designed to be 
> > scope safe [21]. Other constructs in Scheme R5RS, however, enable violation 
> > of scope safety, even though the language does not have dynamic variables. 
> > For a violation of scope safety in spirit, though not technically, we have 
> > that (caddr ’(lambda (x) x)) evaluates to x. According to the R5RS language 
> > definition, ’(lambda (x) x) is a literal expression, and hence the 
> > occurrences of x in it are not variables at all, but just (unscoped) 
> > literal data. So in this example, a variable has been created (namely, the 
> > resulting unquoted x), but not by means of removing it from its scope. 
> > Using quasiquotation, however, the example may be modified to give a true 
> > violation of scope safety. The following expression extracts the variable x 
> > from its scope, by transforming the binding lambda expression into a piece 
> > of literal data, and then extracting and evaluating the quoted variable.
> > ((lambda (y) (eval ‘(car (cdr (cdr ’,y))))) (lambda (x) x))
> This looks pretty goofy to me.  Do you know of R5RS implementations that 
> actually allow you to peel apart a 3d value like this?  Racket (nee MzScheme) 
> certainly doesn't.
> Thanks!
> John Clements

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

  For list-related administrative tasks:

Reply via email to