[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`