Talk About Network



Register and Login
Nick
Password
Register create new account Sign up is FREE and you can post replies, new topics, bookmark posts and more!
Recover lost password


Programming > Functional > Re: The Importa...
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 3 of 28 Topic 2838 of 2841
Post > Topic >>

Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality

by Kyle McGivney <KyleMcG@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > May 7, 2008 at 07:14 PM

> =95 Module, Block, in Mathematica is in lisp's various =93let*=94. The
> lisp's keywords =93let=94, is based on the English word =93let=94. That
wo=
rd
> is one of the English word with multitudes of meanings. If you look up
> its definition in a dictionary, you'll see that it means many
> disparate things. One of them, as in =93let's go=94, has the meaning of
> =93permit; to cause to; allow=94. This meaning is rather vague from a
> mathematical sense. Mathematica's choice of Module, Block, is based on
> the idea that it builds a self-contained segment of code. (however,
> the choice of Block as keyword here isn't perfect, since the word also
> has meanings like =93obstruct; jam=94)

If the purpose of let is to introduce one or more variable bindings,
then I don't see how changing to block or module would improve
anything. I've always found it fairly intuitive to parse (let ((x
5)) ...) to "let x be five". Additionally, replacing let with the
synonyms you provided would approximately yield "permit x to be five"
or "allow x to be five". In my mind you have constructed an argument
in favor of let here (obviously it's better than block, because
nobody's going to come along and be confused about whether let will
"obstruct" or "jam" them :)

There are many easy targets to poke at in the CL spec. let isn't one
of those.




 28 Posts in Topic:
The Importance of Terminology's Quality
"xahlee@[EMAIL PROTE  2008-05-07 16:13:36 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
"Bruce C. Baker"  2008-05-07 18:53:42 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
Kyle McGivney <KyleMcG  2008-05-07 19:14:35 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
"John Thingstad"  2008-05-08 10:05:36 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
George Neuner <gneuner  2008-05-08 01:05:34 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
Jürgen Exner <jurgenex  2008-05-08 06:05:20 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
rpw3@[EMAIL PROTECTED] (  2008-05-09 22:45:26 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
George Neuner <gneuner  2008-05-10 21:01:21 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
kodifik@[EMAIL PROTECTED]  2008-05-08 01:12:27 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
Lew <lew@[EMAIL PROTEC  2008-05-08 06:52:22 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
Sherman Pendley <spamt  2008-05-08 11:08:35 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
"Waylen Gumbal"  2008-05-08 22:38:44 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
Lew <lew@[EMAIL PROTEC  2008-05-09 01:45:04 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
"Waylen Gumbal"  2008-05-08 23:43:03 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
Jürgen Exner <jurgenex  2008-05-09 07:01:02 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
Jürgen Exner <jurgenex  2008-05-09 05:45:21 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
"Waylen Gumbal"  2008-05-08 23:47:46 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
George Neuner <gneuner  2008-05-09 17:56:48 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
"Waylen Gumbal"  2008-05-10 00:56:33 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
Lew <lew@[EMAIL PROTEC  2008-05-10 08:26:55 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
Sherman Pendley <spamt  2008-05-10 12:26:45 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
Lew <lew@[EMAIL PROTEC  2008-05-10 17:38:29 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
Lew <lew@[EMAIL PROTEC  2008-05-10 17:39:42 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
usenet1.3.CalRobert@[EMAI  2008-05-08 03:25:54 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
Lew <lew@[EMAIL PROTEC  2008-05-08 06:53:36 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
George Neuner <gneuner  2008-05-08 21:32:58 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
"j.oke" <jav  2008-05-08 14:39:19 
Re: The Importance of Terminology's Quality
Jon Harrop <jon@[EMAIL  2008-05-08 19:02:18 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
tan12V112 Fri May 16 11:19:47 CDT 2008.