4 ms·
I remember a weird misconception floating around "back in the day" that ISLisp restricted the cdr fields of cons cells to be either nil or cons. Or some sort o
by kazinator 3y ago
I remember a weird misconception floating around "back in the day" that ISLisp restricted the cdr fields of cons cells to be either nil or cons. Or some sort of claim along those lines. But I see from even the 1997 draft that this is not true. I don't see anything that could be easily misread that way, either.
Where did that come from?
In fact, quite the opposite: ISLisp requires all atoms to be considered list terminators. It is documented for the length function that (length '(a b . c)) => 2.
- shawn_w 3y agoI remember someone making that claim about Racket. Turned out they were using a very restricted subset of Scheme intended to be used for a particular introductory programming book, not the actual Racket language.
- shawn_w 3y agoHeh, found this comment of yours in reply to the one about Racket my earlier comment was referring to: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39186136 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39186136