kplug-lpsg  

Messages by Date

• 2008/01/24 Re: Section 1.1 Exercises (Responses Have Answers) Mark Schoonover
• 2008/01/24 Re: Section 1.1 Exercises (Responses Have Answers) David Brown
• 2008/01/24 Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) Gus Wirth
• 2008/01/24 Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) Darren New
• 2008/01/24 Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) Darren New
• 2008/01/24 Re: tail recursion questions Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/24 Re: In Scheme does abstraction = variable = symbol ?? Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/24 Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/24 Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/24 Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/24 Re: [Kooler] Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) Paul G. Allen
• 2008/01/24 [Kooler] Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) Ralph Shumaker
• 2008/01/24 Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) Ralph Shumaker
• 2008/01/24 Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) Ralph Shumaker
• 2008/01/24 Re: tail recursion questions Christopher Smith
• 2008/01/24 Re: tail recursion questions Christopher Smith
• 2008/01/24 Re: tail recursion questions Christopher Smith
• 2008/01/23 Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) Bob La Quey
• 2008/01/23 Re: Section 1.1 Exercises (Responses Have Answers) Brad Beyenhof
• 2008/01/23 Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) Tracy R Reed
• 2008/01/23 Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) Tracy R Reed
• 2008/01/23 Re: tail recursion questions James G. Sack (jim)
• 2008/01/23 Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) James G. Sack (jim)
• 2008/01/23 Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) Darren New
• 2008/01/23 Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) Darren New
• 2008/01/23 tail recursion questions chris
• 2008/01/23 Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/23 In Scheme does abstraction = variable = symbol ?? chris
• 2008/01/23 Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) Tracy R Reed
• 2008/01/23 Re: Section 1.1 Exercises (Responses Have Answers) David Brown
• 2008/01/23 Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) David Brown
• 2008/01/23 Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) SJS
• 2008/01/23 Re: Section 1.1 Exercises (Responses Have Answers) Mark Schoonover
• 2008/01/23 Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) Darren New
• 2008/01/23 Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) SJS
• 2008/01/23 Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) Darren New
• 2008/01/23 Re: Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) David Brown
• 2008/01/23 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? David Brown
• 2008/01/23 Analog vs Digital (was Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) Ralph Shumaker
• 2008/01/23 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Christopher Smith
• 2008/01/23 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Bob La Quey
• 2008/01/23 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Gus Wirth
• 2008/01/23 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Darren New
• 2008/01/23 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Christopher Smith
• 2008/01/23 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/23 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Bob La Quey
• 2008/01/23 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Bob La Quey
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? David Brown
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? David Brown
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/22 RE: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Gabriel Sechan
• 2008/01/22 Section 1.1 Exercises (Responses Have Answers) Mark Schoonover
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Gus Wirth
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Jack Eisenbach
• 2008/01/22 RE: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Gabriel Sechan
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? chris
• 2008/01/22 RE: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Gabriel Sechan
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? David Brown
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? David Brown
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Gus Wirth
• 2008/01/22 RE: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Gabriel Sechan
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? chris
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? chris
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Darren New
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/22 RE: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Gabriel Sechan
• 2008/01/22 Re: Hardware Hacking (Was: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) David Brown
• 2008/01/22 Hardware Hacking (Was: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?) SJS
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? SJS
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? David Brown
• 2008/01/22 RE: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Gabriel Sechan
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? David Brown
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? SJS
• 2008/01/22 RE: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Gabriel Sechan
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Carl Lowenstein
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Gus Wirth
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? SJS
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? SJS
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? SJS
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? chris
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? chris
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Tracy R Reed
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Tracy R Reed
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? chris
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? David Brown
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? David Brown
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Gus Wirth
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? chris
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? chris
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? chris
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Gus Wirth
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? chris
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Brad Beyenhof
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? chris
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Tracy R Reed
• 2008/01/22 Anyone know about MIT's new Python based replacement for the SICP course? chris
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? SJS
• 2008/01/22 Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? Mark Schoonover
• 2008/01/22 Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? chris
• 2008/01/21 Re: What is a good Scheme interpreter to go through SICP with? Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/21 Re: Emacs attitude (Was: Are we doing SICP Ch1 in one week? + Where is Ch1 homework?) chris
• 2008/01/21 Re: Vim and Lisp Mark Schoonover
• 2008/01/21 Re: Emacs attitude (Was: Are we doing SICP Ch1 in one week? + Where is Ch1 homework?) SJS
• 2008/01/20 Re: Emacs attitude (Was: Are we doing SICP Ch1 in one week? + Where is Ch1 homework?) Christopher Smith
• 2008/01/20 Re: Emacs attitude (Was: Are we doing SICP Ch1 in one week? + Where is Ch1 homework?) Christopher Smith
• 2008/01/20 CapsLock (Was: Vim and Lisp) SJS
• 2008/01/20 Re: Vim and Lisp David Brown
• 2008/01/20 Re: Vim and Lisp SJS
• 2008/01/20 Re: Emacs attitude (Was: Are we doing SICP Ch1 in one week? + Where is Ch1 homework?) SJS
• 2008/01/20 Re: Vim and Lisp David Brown
• 2008/01/20 Re: Emacs attitude (Was: Are we doing SICP Ch1 in one week? + Where is Ch1 homework?) David Brown
• 2008/01/20 Vim and Lisp Mark Schoonover
• 2008/01/20 Re: Emacs attitude (Was: Are we doing SICP Ch1 in one week? + Where is Ch1 homework?) Mark Schoonover
• 2008/01/20 Re: Emacs attitude (Was: Are we doing SICP Ch1 in one week? + Where is Ch1 homework?) SJS
• 2008/01/20 Re: SICP Assignmet #2 Mark Schoonover
• 2008/01/20 Re: Emacs attitude (Was: Are we doing SICP Ch1 in one week? + Where is Ch1 homework?) David Brown
• 2008/01/20 Re: Emacs attitude (Was: Are we doing SICP Ch1 in one week? + Where is Ch1 homework?) Tracy R Reed
• 2008/01/20 Emacs attitude (Was: Are we doing SICP Ch1 in one week? + Where is Ch1 homework?) SJS
• 2008/01/20 Re: SICP Assignmet #2 Brad Beyenhof
• 2008/01/20 Re: What is a good Scheme interpreter to go through SICP with? David Brown
• 2008/01/20 Re: What is a good Scheme interpreter to go through SICP with? James G. Sack (jim)
• 2008/01/20 SICP Assignmet #2 Mark Schoonover
• 2008/01/20 Re: SICP Project 0 Mark Schoonover
• 2008/01/20 Scheme inside of Emacs instructions. David Brown
• 2008/01/19 Re: Are we doing SICP Ch1 in one week? + Where is Ch1 homework? Brad Beyenhof
• 2008/01/19 Re: Are we doing SICP Ch1 in one week? + Where is Ch1 homework? Mark Schoonover
• 2008/01/19 Re: Are we doing SICP Ch1 in one week? + Where is Ch1 homework? Brad Beyenhof
• 2008/01/19 Re: Are we doing SICP Ch1 in one week? + Where is Ch1 homework? David Brown
• 2008/01/19 Re: Are we doing SICP Ch1 in one week? + Where is Ch1 homework? Mark Schoonover
• 2008/01/19 Re: Are we doing SICP Ch1 in one week? + Where is Ch1 homework? Brad Beyenhof
• 2008/01/19 Are we doing SICP Ch1 in one week? + Where is Ch1 homework? chris
• 2008/01/18 SICP Project 0 Mark Schoonover
• 2008/01/17 Re: On writing own Scheme interpreter as exercise & 1st week of SICP... David Brown
• 2008/01/17 SICP Page Update & Admisitrivia Mark Schoonover
• 2008/01/17 Re: destructors and finalization [hijacked from Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow?] Darren New
• 2008/01/17 Re: destructors and finalization [hijacked from Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow?] Christopher Smith
• 2008/01/17 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Darren New
• 2008/01/17 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Darren New
• 2008/01/17 Re: destructors and finalization [hijacked from Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow?] Darren New
• 2008/01/17 Re: My first computer [ was Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow?] Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/17 My first computer [ was Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow?] Bob La Quey
• 2008/01/17 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/17 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/17 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Bob La Quey
• 2008/01/17 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Chuck Esterbrook
• 2008/01/17 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? James G. Sack (jim)
• 2008/01/17 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Chuck Esterbrook
• 2008/01/17 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Bob La Quey
• 2008/01/17 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/17 Re: useful in Scheme to have abstractions on *data* as well as functions? Got a useful example? Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/17 Re: On writing own Scheme interpreter as exercise & 1st week of SICP... Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/17 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Bob La Quey
• 2008/01/17 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Bob La Quey
• 2008/01/17 Re: On writing own Scheme interpreter as exercise & 1st week of SICP... Brad Beyenhof
• 2008/01/17 Re: On writing own Scheme interpreter as exercise & 1st week of SICP... Mark Schoonover
• 2008/01/17 Re: On writing own Scheme interpreter as exercise & 1st week of SICP... Brad Beyenhof
• 2008/01/17 Re: On writing own Scheme interpreter as exercise & 1st week of SICP... chris
• 2008/01/17 Re: On writing own Scheme interpreter as exercise & 1st week of SICP... chris
• 2008/01/17 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Tracy R Reed
• 2008/01/17 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/17 useful in Scheme to have abstractions on *data* as well as functions? Got a useful example? chris
• 2008/01/17 Re: On writing own Scheme interpreter as exercise & 1st week of SICP... Mark Schoonover
• 2008/01/17 Re: destructors and finalization [hijacked from Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow?] Christopher Smith
• 2008/01/17 Re: destructors and finalization [hijacked from Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow?] Chuck Esterbrook
• 2008/01/17 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Chuck Esterbrook
• 2008/01/17 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Chuck Esterbrook
• 2008/01/17 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Chuck Esterbrook
• 2008/01/17 Re: On writing own Scheme interpreter as exercise & 1st week of SICP... Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/16 Re: On writing own Scheme interpreter as exercise & 1st week of SICP... Tracy R Reed
• 2008/01/16 On writing own Scheme interpreter as exercise & 1st week of SICP... chris
• 2008/01/16 Re: destructors and finalization [hijacked from Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow?] Darren New
• 2008/01/16 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Darren New
• 2008/01/16 Re: destructors and finalization [hijacked from Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow?] Christopher Smith
• 2008/01/16 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Darren New
• 2008/01/16 Re: destructors and finalization [hijacked from Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow?] Darren New
• 2008/01/16 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Christopher Smith
• 2008/01/16 Re: destructors and finalization [hijacked from Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow?] Christopher Smith
• 2008/01/16 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Andrew Lentvorski
• 2008/01/16 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Neil Schneider
• 2008/01/16 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? James G. Sack (jim)
• 2008/01/16 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Bob La Quey
• 2008/01/16 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? James G. Sack (jim)
• 2008/01/16 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? James G. Sack (jim)
• 2008/01/16 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Bob La Quey
• 2008/01/16 Re: teaching languages [forked from Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow?] Gus Wirth
• 2008/01/16 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? SJS
• 2008/01/16 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Tracy R Reed
• 2008/01/16 Isolationism Was: destructors and finalization SJS
• 2008/01/16 Re: teaching languages [forked from Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow?] Tracy R Reed
• 2008/01/16 Re: Destructors and Exceptions (Was: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow?) SJS
• 2008/01/16 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Darren New
• 2008/01/16 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Darren New
• 2008/01/16 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Darren New
• 2008/01/16 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Darren New
• 2008/01/16 Re: destructors and finalization [hijacked from Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow?] Darren New
• 2008/01/16 Re: Where are the software engineers of tomorrow? Mark Schoonover

• Earlier messages
• Later messages