From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Chong Yidong Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: "Misunderstanding of the lambda calculus" Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 00:42:16 -0500 Message-ID: <87bqxva8uf.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1138524809 7711 80.91.229.2 (29 Jan 2006 08:53:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 08:53:29 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Jan 29 09:53:25 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F38JI-0000tZ-Pj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 09:53:24 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F38MC-0007UY-Mc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 03:56:24 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1F35NH-00056B-Is for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 00:45:20 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1F35NF-00055K-F7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 00:45:17 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F35NE-00055A-Hz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 00:45:16 -0500 Original-Received: from [18.95.5.111] (helo=localhost.localdomain) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1F35LJ-0001mX-CY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 00:43:17 -0500 Original-Received: by localhost.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2FC3F1E42C1; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 00:42:16 -0500 (EST) Original-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:49665 Archived-At: This may amuse some of the readers of this mailing list. While browsing the Wikipedia entry on lambda calculus, I saw that some wit had written: Lisp uses a variant of lambda notation for defining functions, but only its purely functional subset is really equivalent to lambda calculus. Strictly speaking, this holds only for modern dialects of Lisp, such as Common Lisp and Scheme. More archaic Lisps, such as Emacs Lisp, still use dynamic binding, and so are not based on the lambda calculus. Rather, they are based on the syntax of the lambda calculus, together with a misunderstanding of the notion of binding and substitution in the lambda calculus.