[email protected] scripsit: To: [email protected] Subject: new wording for eqv? From: [email protected] Date: Fri, 17 Jun 88 18:20:58 EDT Cc: [email protected], willc%[email protected], [email protected], [email protected] In-Reply-To: Kent M Pitman's message of Fri, 17 Jun 88 16:09 EDT [email protected]> Date: Fri, 17 Jun 88 16:09 EDT From: Kent M Pitman <[email protected]> I observe as an aside also that your description is somewhat meta-circular, though perhaps not enough to worry about here. You effectively begin by saying that EQV? computes whether two things are distinct (for which i read "not the same"), and yet the terminology uses the word "the same" all over the place. Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose.
24 years later, still going round. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose. -- Some people open all the Windows; John Cowan wise wives welcome the spring [email protected] by moving the Unix. http://www.ccil.org/~cowan --ad for Unix Book Units (U.K.) (see http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/unix3image.gif) _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
