simulating local lexical variables with symbol macros
in [Lisp]
|
Prev: Mistake in the specification of rotatef ?
Next: [ann] LTK based libraries Runtime Library 3.0 and Gestalt Items 1.1
From: Ron Garret on 12 Nov 2009 16:47 In article <m3my2r7utw.fsf(a)moon.robolove.meer.net>, Madhu <enometh(a)meer.net> wrote: > The fact that the CL macro system is > powerful enough to implement a hygienic subset is not an especially > interesting result, That may be true, but that is not Costanza's result. You may wish to consider taking the trouble to actually learn what you are talking about before proclaiming things uninteresting. I'm pretty sure you will find these exchanges less frustrating if you do. Whatever it is you are hoping to accomplish you'll probably do better if you stop showcasing your ignorance so prominently. rg
From: Madhu on 12 Nov 2009 16:47 * Ron Garret <rNOSPAMon-47B774.13470912112009(a)news.albasani.net> : Wrote on Thu, 12 Nov 2009 13:47:10 -0800: | In article <m3my2r7utw.fsf(a)moon.robolove.meer.net>, | Madhu <enometh(a)meer.net> wrote: | |> The fact that the CL macro system is |> powerful enough to implement a hygienic subset is not an especially |> interesting result, | | That may be true, but that is not Costanza's result. The one making a claim that it was Costanza's result was you. I have only responded to the claim you made. | You may wish to consider taking the trouble to actually learn what you | are talking about before proclaiming things uninteresting. I'm pretty | sure you will find these exchanges less frustrating if you do. | Whatever it is you are hoping to accomplish you'll probably do better | if you stop showcasing your ignorance so prominently. These exchanges are apparently frustrating, not because of lack of knowledge on my part but because you continue to INDULGE in dishonest debate. You accuse me of ignorance to cover all ignorance of CL yourself exhibit. One of your claims about symbol macros that lead to this thread is an example. -- Madhu
From: Madhu on 12 Nov 2009 17:09 * Ron Garret <rNOSPAMon-9377B6.05012412112009(a)news.albasani.net> : Wrote on Thu, 12 Nov 2009 05:01:25 -0800: |> |> It is sad. It seems the other old-timers are not interested in |> |> correcting the intentionally misleading posts you make or pointing out |> |> your dishonest debate tactics you continue to indule in. |> | |> | Yes, damn all those old timers. They should all be taking me to task |> | for "unduling" in the dishonest debate tactic of agreeing with you. |> | What is wrong with these people? |> |> You have introduced a typo when misstating what I've said to take away |> the point I'm making. You are INDULGING, again, | | Are you sure? I thought I was undoling. But what do I know? You know how to twist, misrepresent, and misstate my position to make it appear I am uneducated or ignorant, as if to detract from the fact I am drawing attention to: that you lack intellectual integrity, -- Madhu
From: Ron Garret on 12 Nov 2009 20:06 In article <m37htv76vl.fsf(a)moon.robolove.meer.net>, Madhu <enometh(a)meer.net> wrote: > * Ron Garret <rNOSPAMon-47B774.13470912112009(a)news.albasani.net> : > Wrote on Thu, 12 Nov 2009 13:47:10 -0800: > > | In article <m3my2r7utw.fsf(a)moon.robolove.meer.net>, > | Madhu <enometh(a)meer.net> wrote: > | > |> The fact that the CL macro system is > |> powerful enough to implement a hygienic subset is not an especially > |> interesting result, > | > | That may be true, but that is not Costanza's result. > > The one making a claim that it was Costanza's result was you. I have > only responded to the claim you made. No, you have not. You need to go back and read more carefully. > | You may wish to consider taking the trouble to actually learn what you > | are talking about before proclaiming things uninteresting. I'm pretty > | sure you will find these exchanges less frustrating if you do. > | Whatever it is you are hoping to accomplish you'll probably do better > | if you stop showcasing your ignorance so prominently. > > These exchanges are apparently frustrating, not because of lack of > knowledge on my part but because you continue to INDULGE in dishonest > debate. You accuse me of ignorance to cover all ignorance of CL > yourself exhibit. One of your claims about symbol macros that lead to > this thread is an example. This thread was started by Vassil Nikolov, who posted a constructive proof that my conjecture about symbol macros being able to emulate local as well as global lexical variables (I presume that is the claim to which you are alluding) was in fact correct. I don't know how to get any more honest than that. So no, I do not "accuse" you of ignorance. You wear your ignorance (to say nothing of your brazen foolishness) on your sleeve. You post it on the Internet for all to see. You go out of your way to draw attention to it when you could have just let sleeping dogs lie. You brazenly manifest your ignorance again and again and again, and when someone calls you on it you whine, "I'm NOT ignorant. I'm not! I'm not! I'M NOT!" Bah. rg
From: Ron Garret on 12 Nov 2009 20:09
In article <m3zl6r5ray.fsf(a)moon.robolove.meer.net>, Madhu <enometh(a)meer.net> wrote: > * Ron Garret <rNOSPAMon-9377B6.05012412112009(a)news.albasani.net> : > Wrote on Thu, 12 Nov 2009 05:01:25 -0800: > > |> |> It is sad. It seems the other old-timers are not interested in > |> |> correcting the intentionally misleading posts you make or pointing out > |> |> your dishonest debate tactics you continue to indule in. > |> | > |> | Yes, damn all those old timers. They should all be taking me to task > |> | for "unduling" in the dishonest debate tactic of agreeing with you. > |> | What is wrong with these people? > |> > |> You have introduced a typo when misstating what I've said to take away > |> the point I'm making. You are INDULGING, again, > | > | Are you sure? I thought I was undoling. But what do I know? > > You know how to twist, misrepresent, and misstate my position to make it > appear I am uneducated or ignorant You give me far too much credit. When it comes to making it appear that you are uneducated and ignorant, you are truly the master and I merely the humble student. rg |