[Haskell-cafe] Comparison with Clean?

Benjamin Franksen benjamin.franksen at bessy.de
Wed May 4 19:33:05 EDT 2005

On Wednesday 04 May 2005 23:24, karczma at info.unicaen.fr wrote:
> Benjamin Franksen writes:
> > karczma at info.unicaen.fr wrote:
> >> Bryce Bockman writes:
> >>
> >> Don't confuse categories please. SICP doesn't say how to make a lazy
> >> variant of Scheme. Applicative protocol is not normal protocol, the
> >> reduction is, as it is.
> >
> > We may have a different copy of SICP, but in mine (2nd edition) there is
> > Chapter 4.2 "Variantions on a Scheme -- Lazy Evaluation" and in
> > particular 4.2.2 "An Interpreter with Lazy Evaluation".
> Absolutely right, and BTW., I had
> http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/full-text/book/book-Z-H-27.html#%_sec_4.2
> on the screen when I wrote what I wrote. Michael Vanier explained well
> my aim (better than myself, an optional sad smiley here...).
> I wanted just to say that a lazy interpreter etc., *is not Scheme*. Well,
> AS say: "In this section we will implement a normal-order language that is
> the same as Scheme except that compound procedures are non-strict in each
> argument. Primitive procedures will still be strict." We read, and we see
> that the lazy layer is a superficial one, with 'forcing' implemented at
> the surface, so for me it was enough to remark that I consider it to be
> a different language.

Ok, I think I see now what you mean.


More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list