On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 10:20 PM, Biep <[email protected]> wrote: > >From: Mark H Weaver > > Then all of: > > (make-rectangular x_1 x_2) => z > > [...] > > (real-part z) => x_1 > > (imag-part z) => x_2 > > [...] > > are true, [...] > > Which is a good starting point for my question. > > What is the equality/equivalence implied by the re-use of an argument > name? Did I overlook that in the draft? I think it ought to be stated > somewhere. >
I mostly answered this in my previous reply. The => notation is described in section 1.3.4, and reads as "evaluates to". It is not defined formally, but goes on to say: [expression] evaluates, in the initial environment, to an object that can be represented externally by the sequence of characters [result] so one can assume the objects must be written the same. -- Alex
_______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
