Re: local binding, too local...

[Jean-Christophe Helary <brandelune@gmail.com>]

> On Dec 9, 2018, at 17:45, <tomas@tuxteam.de> <tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Dec 09, 2018 at 11:41:19AM +0900, Jean-Christophe Helary wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Dec 9, 2018, at 6:59, <tomas@tuxteam.de> <tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 11:45:32PM +0900, Jean-Christophe Helary wrote:
>>>> Thank you Tomas.
>>>> 
>>>> So can you say that "binding" is like "creating" a variable ?
>>> 
>>> No (at least not in this Lisp context). It's more like associating
>>> a name with a variable.
>> 
>> But there must be something that's created that did not exist before that "binding" right ?
> 
> The association :-)

Ok, that's what I needed to know :)

> Technically, there's some hash table in the background, where
> the implementation can look up symbols and what's been "hung"
> on them (besides a "variable binding" there are some other
> possibilities,,,)

Thank you.

> 
>>> "Assigning 7 to x" wouldn't make much sense in maths, because it would
>>> amount to assigning 7 to 5.
>> 
>> Ok so the comparison with maths doesn't work, right ?
> 
> I'd say that the "maths" view was an inspiration, so it always helps
> to keep it around for comparison. But it's important to remember that
> there are differences.
> 
> That doesn't mean that maths can't model assignment, though.

That will be for another time :)


Jean-Christophe Helary
-----------------------------------------------
http://mac4translators.blogspot.com @brandelune