[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: functional programming is great, but why lists?

To: Bill Richter <richter@math.nwu.edu>
Subject: Re: functional programming is great, but why lists?
From: Shriram Krishnamurthi <sk@cs.brown.edu>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 21:15:01 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: plt-scheme@fast.cs.utah.edu
In-Reply-To: <200110120110.UAA00355@banach.math.nwu.edu>
References: <200110102329.f9ANTnH19850@wrath.cs.utah.edu><200110110342.WAA00959@banach.math.nwu.edu><200110110424.AAA13006@bosch.cs.brown.edu><200110120110.UAA00355@banach.math.nwu.edu>
Sender: owner-plt-scheme@fast.cs.utah.edu

Olin is wrong, Bill.  He writes well to obscure the weakness of his
thoughts.  We don't need lists at all.

Matthias and I look forward to your 10,000 line Scheme program that
uses LAMBDA instead of lists.

Shriram

Follow-Ups:
- Re: functional programming is great, but why lists?
  - From: Bill Richter <richter@math.northwestern.edu>

References:
- 199.25
  - From: Matthew Flatt <mflatt@cs.utah.edu>
- functional programming is great, but why lists?
  - From: Bill Richter <richter@math.nwu.edu>
- functional programming is great, but why lists?
  - From: Shriram Krishnamurthi <sk@cs.brown.edu>
- Re: functional programming is great, but why lists?
  - From: Bill Richter <richter@math.nwu.edu>

Prev by Date: Re: functional programming is great, but why lists?
Next by Date: Re: functional programming is great, but why lists?
Prev by thread: Re: functional programming is great, but why lists?
Next by thread: Re: functional programming is great, but why lists?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread