variable/binding terminology

["CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@icst-ecf>]

>     Me: no other language I know of that has
>     recursion speaks of "different bindings of the same variable" to
>     explain what's going on with the parameter list of a recursively
>     invoked function. 
> 
> From: Jonathan A Rees <JAR@AI.AI.MIT.EDU>
>  
> This usage is consistent with the usage in mathematics, and with Alonzo
> Church's terminology in his paper on lambda calculus.  To a
> mathematician or logician, a variable is a name like "x".  A variable
> "varies" exactly because it DOES have different bindings at different
> times, e.g. at different steps of a recursion.  It is computer
> scientists who have perverted the sense of the word and use it to mean
> what ought to be called a location.

whatever... the practical issue is whether the primary audience for
a CL standard is going to be logicians or computer scientists, whether
perverting or ... oh you know.  It seems clear to me that for every
logician who nods in approval of this theoretically correct usage,
there will be 100 confused computer scientists/programmers, etc.
Assuming also that logicians are smarter than computer scientists,
both democracy and charity recommend using "normal" programming 
language lingo.

John Cugini  <Cugini@icst-ecf>

------