[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Chicken-users] Why there is no "nil"?

From: Alex Stuart
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] Why there is no "nil"?
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 09:46:34 -0800
User-agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.9.5

"It's remarkable how much energy in the standardization of Lisp dialects has been dissipated in arguments that are literally over nothing: Should nil be an ordinary name? Should the value of nil be a symbol? Should it be a list? Should it be a pair? In Scheme, nil is an ordinary name.... Other dialects of Lisp, including Common Lisp, treat nil as a special symbol. The authors of this book, who have endured too many language standardization brawls, would like to avoid the entire issue."

(from "Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs" by Harold Abelson and Gerald Sussman)


On 2014-12-17 00:48, Kristian Lein-Mathisen wrote:
Hi Bahman,

I just thought I'd add that the only thing that evaluates to false in
Scheme is #f.

On Dec 17, 2014 9:42 AM, "Christian Kellermann" <address@hidden>

* Bahman Movaqar <address@hidden> [141217 09:35]:
I'm curious to know why "nil" is not defined in CHICKEN and one
has to
use '() instead? TIA,

PS: Or am I missing something ridiculously obvious!?

This is scheme not lisp. nil is not defined in R5RS scheme.
And I think it is not defined in R6RS or R7RS either.

Kind regards,


May you be peaceful, may you live in safety, may you be free from
suffering, and may you live with ease.

Chicken-users mailing list
address@hidden [1]


Chicken-users mailing list

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]