Re:(λove (print (eval (read))))
by fogus on Monday September 09, 2013 @05:32PM
(#6356385)
I won't argue for the aesthetics, but I am curious what you mean by "loss of generality."
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:(λove (print (eval (read))))
by breckinloggins on Monday September 09, 2013 @05:50PM
(#6356500)
Perhaps that was worded wrong, but what I meant was the idea that you have names that map to things, and that you have an evaluation order for those things. So that if you see
(foo a b c) and it isn't quoted, we know that foo will be resolved and evaluated, so will a, b, and c, and then the objects to which a, b, and c resolved will be applied to the object to which foo was resolved.
So, if I then type (a foo b c), we get the same behavior with different object resolutions.
And that should work everywhere, all the time.