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

*To*: Common-Lisp@SU-AI.ARPA*Subject*: SETF and LAMBDAs (semi-serious?)*From*: William Galway <Galway@UTAH-20.ARPA>*Date*: Thu 13 Oct 83 11:53:06-MDT

All this discussion about the power of SETF has reminded me of an idea that I've been toying with for awhile. Basically, I'd like to modify the lambda calculus to allow non-atomic "arguments" for the lambda. So, in addition to things like: (lambda (x) (lambda (y) x)) (the K combinator, I think), it would also be legitimate to have things like: (lambda (x) ((lambda ((y x)) (y x)) x)) (which I think would be the identity function). I don't claim that there's any good reason for doing this--it just seemed like a natural thing to do during one of my weirder moments. If anyone knows if work has already been done with this funny variant of the lambda calculus, I'd be interested in hearing about it. On the other hand, if we leave the world of pure mathematical systems and enter the world of Lisp, it does kind of appeal to me to be able to write code like: (let ( ((elt v 0) (length v))) v) but, I'm not seriously suggesting that it be implemented... -- Will Galway -------

- Prev by Date:
**Re: SETF and Prolog** - Next by Date:
**SETF and LAMBDAs (semi-serious?)** - Previous by thread:
**Re: SETF and Prolog** - Next by thread:
**SETF and LAMBDAs (semi-serious?)** - Index(es):