[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Question with binding
Just to further the argument about redefining primative functions, TI's PC
Scheme behaves like this:
(lambda (x y n)
(modulo (+ x y) n)))
(+ 1 2 3) ==> 0
(+ 1 2 3)))
(blah) ==> 6
I realise that + is treated specially, but this seems to be an undesirable
(and inconsistant) way to handle primative function redefinition. What's
more, the values of pcs-integrate-integrables and pcs-integrate-primatives
don't seem to affect this behavior. Comments anyone?
email@example.com "Through Nambocour, and up the coast,
Dept. of Computer Science the grass is greener, the girls are sweeter,
University of Western Australia I did it all in the last ten summers."
CRAWLEY 6009 - Cold Chisel, "Hound dog"