Re: [stack] sweetening concatenative syntax

Christopher Diggins scripsit:
> > > In other words you can't write code (in R5RS) that distinguishes
> > > whether a given value is a closure, a function or a procedure.
> >
> > Closures satisfy PROCEDURE?, procedures satisfy PAIR? (and more specific
> > predicates). Functions are abstracta, and don't have representations
> > in Scheme.
> 
> That is interesting. I can't find in the specification
> (http://schemers.org/Documents/Standards/R5RS/r5rs.pdf) that closures
> must not satisfy "PAIR?". Can you point it out?

3.2 says that PROCEDURE? and PAIR? are disjoint.  It's true that in R5RS
"procedure" is used instead of "closure", but in talking about Scheme
I usually hear "closure" for the object, and "procedure" for the text.

-- 
A mosquito cried out in his pain,               John Cowan
"A chemist has poisoned my brain!"              http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
        The cause of his sorrow                 [email protected]
        Was para-dichloro-
Diphenyltrichloroethane.                                (aka DDT)