home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!att!allegra!alice!ark
- From: ark@alice.att.com (Andrew Koenig)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme
- Subject: Re: applying or
- Message-ID: <24517@alice.att.com>
- Date: 30 Dec 92 18:38:15 GMT
- Article-I.D.: alice.24517
- References: <PK.92Dec28100620@talitiainen.cs.tut.fi> <HULTQUIS.92Dec28102345@wk206.nas.nasa.gov> <MOB.92Dec30090646@strident.think.com> <1hsiocINN2v6@columbia.cs.ubc.ca>
- Reply-To: ark@alice.UUCP ()
- Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill NJ
- Lines: 11
-
- In article <1hsiocINN2v6@columbia.cs.ubc.ca> manis@cs.ubc.ca (Vincent Manis) writes:
-
- > People insist on thinking of `and' as a procedure, no doubt because many
- > computers have an AND instruction. `and' is a control operation, just as
- > are `if' and `cond'.
-
- Of course, in lazy languages, there's no difference.
- So perhaps people who can't tell them apart are guilty of lazy thinking?
- --
- --Andrew Koenig
- ark@europa.att.com
-