Re: [Scheme-reports] Procedural equivalence: the last debate
John Cowan 05 Jun 2013 16:52 UTC
William D Clinger scripsit:
> With regard to the R5RS semantics, John has explained his reasoning.
> -From- John's explanation, I know he jumped to a false conclusion
> via an invalid generalization based on his incorrect guess about the
> purpose of two examples. I will post on this at length when I have
> time this evening (and access to my archives).
I look forward to this with bait on my breath.
--
If I read "upcoming" in [the newspaper] John Cowan
once more, I will be downcoming http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
and somebody will be outgoing. cowan@ccil.org
_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports