[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "Misunderstanding of the lambda calculus"
From: |
Jonathan Yavner |
Subject: |
Re: "Misunderstanding of the lambda calculus" |
Date: |
Sun, 29 Jan 2006 12:51:29 -0500 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.6.2 |
> This may amuse some of the readers of this mailing list. While
> browsing the Wikipedia entry on lambda calculus, I saw that some wit
> had written:
> More archaic Lisps, such as Emacs Lisp, still use dynamic binding,
> and so are not based on the lambda calculus. Rather, they are
> based on the syntax of the lambda calculus, together with a
> misunderstanding of the notion of binding and substitution in the
> lambda calculus.
Okay, I'll bite. I slapped an {{NPOV}} sticker on that section
("failure to maintain neutral point of view"). Would anyone who cares
about such things please edit my complaint for correctness?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Lambda_calculus#Programming_languages
| The section on programming languages seems to be POV. It refers to
| Emacs Lisp but not ALGOL 60 as "archaic" (only Emacs Lisp is still in
| use). It incorrectly lauds Common Lisp as lacking dynamic binding (all
| Lisps need dynamic binding, which CL calls "special variables"). The
| claim that binding in Lisps don't match the lambda calculus because
| their authors "misunderstand" the calculus (rather than because the
| calculus in pure form has poor efficiency) is just a damn lie.
- "Misunderstanding of the lambda calculus", Chong Yidong, 2006/01/29
- Re: "Misunderstanding of the lambda calculus",
Jonathan Yavner <=
- Re: "Misunderstanding of the lambda calculus", David Kastrup, 2006/01/29
- Re: "Misunderstanding of the lambda calculus", Richard M. Stallman, 2006/01/30
- Re: "Misunderstanding of the lambda calculus", David Kastrup, 2006/01/30
- Re: "Misunderstanding of the lambda calculus", Richard M. Stallman, 2006/01/31
- Re: "Misunderstanding of the lambda calculus", Kevin Rodgers, 2006/01/31
- Re: "Misunderstanding of the lambda calculus", Stefan Monnier, 2006/01/31
- Re: "Misunderstanding of the lambda calculus", David Kastrup, 2006/01/31