Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
Stan Shebs (talk | contribs) more cond |
||
Line 66:
:::::Have a little imagination. If I can get the ''effect'' of "cond" using lambda calculus, I'm sure someone smarter than me can get the ''syntax'' in a similar fashion. Lambda calculus is Turing-equivalent on its own, and doesn't need a "cond" primitive to get that way. --[[User:P3d0|P3d0]] 11:27, 8 Aug 2003 (UTC)
::::::This is an article on Lisp, not alternate possibilities for Lisp-like languages. The purpose of the encyclopedia is to describe things as they are, not as they could be, unless the hypothetical somehow elucidates. For instance, one could make a comment that "cond is not strictly necessary under some evaluation regimes" or some such, and in fact there is an interesting little bit of history about how these particular primitives came to be chosen. [[User:Stan Shebs|Stan]] 13:45, 8 Aug 2003 (UTC)
| |||