[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Chicken-users] The predicate "atom?" considered bizarre
From: |
John Cowan |
Subject: |
[Chicken-users] The predicate "atom?" considered bizarre |
Date: |
Thu, 31 Aug 2006 11:17:55 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.3.28i |
While messing around with some stuff in Paul Graham's paper "The Roots
of Lisp" I was quite surprised to find that Chicken's "atom?" predicate
returns #f on the empty list. This is the documented behavior.
This is contrary to historic practice from Lisp 1.5 through Common Lisp.
(Of course that is partly because () = NIL in that tradition, and NIL
is a symbol.) R1RS was the last Scheme standard to specify ATOM, and
it had the same semantics then.
Why was this changed? Can it be fixed?
--
That you can cover for the plentiful John Cowan
and often gaping errors, misconstruals, http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
and disinformation in your posts address@hidden
through sheer volume -- that is another
misconception. --Mike to Peter
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- [Chicken-users] The predicate "atom?" considered bizarre,
John Cowan <=