On 17 Apr 1997 16:04:25 GMT, firstname.lastname@example.org (Charles Lin) wrote:
> Notice this is why I said "if one HAD to" choose a single data type,
>a string would probably be it. I didn't argue that it was a good idea.
>In other words, given that you had to choose one type that a language
>had to be in, what would you choose? The problem with lists is that
>a list is really a compound data structure. For example, in a Lisp
>list (a (b c)), what is "a", "b", and "c"? Lists are built from
>basic elements. Yes, yes, you can build up some sort of counting by
>using the empty list and list of empty lists, and so on, but again,
>ease of programming counts.
It's that misconception again! TCL is lists of characters! Scheme has
a load of types which are on equal footings, in that containers and
atoms are interchangeable!
> My preference is to have multiple types.
What, like TCL does, you mean? :-)
"Plug and Play support: WfEWAD will autodetect any installed
Nuclear Arsenals, Laser Satellites, Battlefield Control Networks,
Radar Installations, Fighter Squadrons, and other WfEWAD compliant
devices, including the new Macrosoft Unnatural Keyboard, with
full support for the now-famous Big Red Buttom(tm)."
(Windows for Early Warning and Defence User's manual P26)
Alaric B. Williams Internet : email@example.com
<A HREF="http://www.abwillms.demon.co.uk/">Hello :-)</A>
>From firstname.lastname@example.org Sat Apr 19 03:59:41 1997
Received: from bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU by martigny.ai.mit.edu with ESMTP
(184.108.40.206/16.2) id AA197906781; Sat, 19 Apr 1997 03:59:41 -0400
Received: (from news@localhost) by bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU (8.7.6/25-eef) id
DAA29955 for email@example.com; Sat, 19 Apr 1997 03:37:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from USENET by bloom-beacon with netnews
for firstname.lastname@example.org (email@example.com);
contact usenet@bloom-beacon if you have questions.
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 22:09:30 GMT
From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Paul Prescod)
Organization: University of Waterloo Computer Science Club
Subject: Re: Reply to Ousterhout's reply (was Re: Ousterhout and Tcl ...)
In article <email@example.com>,
Robert Virding <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>In article <E8sJ14.wG@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca>,
>email@example.com (Paul Prescod) writes:
>>In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
>>Chris Bitmead uid(x22068) <Chris.Bitmead@alcatel.com.au> wrote:
>>>none the wiser (apart from awful performance of course). Why do you
>>>want to fit everything in a string?? It buys you NOTHING.
>>It buys you not having to write string->number. I don't think that this is a
>>big win, but I could see how it would be useful to people who are not used
>>to thinking about data types.
>Actually there is no win at all. If you are going to DO anything with
>the number you need string->number. The question in this case is
>rather WHEN you do the conversion.
No, the system does the conversion implicitly. The user never types
>If it is not the language itself then it must be some property of the
>system itself which is useful and not found in other language
>systems. What I don't know.
Tk, which was tied to Tcl in the early days.