February 2007 Archives by date

• Messages sorted by: [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
• More info on this list...

Starting: Fri Feb 2 11:51:48 EDT 2007
Ending: Wed Feb 28 21:40:55 EDT 2007
Messages: 315

• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] floor, ceiling, truncate, and round are unnecessarily over-specified on infinities and NaNs   Aubrey Jaffer
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Compound conditions considered bogus   cowan at ccil.org
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Binary and string pseudo-transcoders should die   cowan at ccil.org
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] utf-32-codec is useless   cowan at ccil.org
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Port predicates   cowan at ccil.org
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] The standard-*-port procedures should return a fresh binary port   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] The mess around line endings   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Buffer mode should be specifiable on open-file-input-port   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] preposterous mustard   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] Standard Libraries: Table of Contents and Summary   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] argument names in library section 1.1: char vs. letter   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] confusion about which bytevectors exist   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] No defaults given for sealed and opaque   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] preposterous mustard   Felix Klock
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] preposterous mustard   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] Byte Arrays in the Lexical Syntax   Michael McDermott
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   AndrevanTonder
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] The standard-*-port procedures should return a fresh binary port   Per Bothner
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] The standard-*-port procedures should return a fresh binary port   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Bytevectors: `big' and `little' endianness under-specified   Ludovic Courtès
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Add symbol=? and boolean=?   Lauri Alanko
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Add symbol=? and boolean=?   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Add symbol=? and boolean=?   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Add symbol=? and boolean=?   Lauri Alanko
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Compound conditions considered bogus   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Buffer mode should be specifiable on open-file-input-port   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Add symbol=? and boolean=?   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Add symbol=? and boolean=?   Carl Eastlund
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Buffer mode should be specifiable on open-file-input-port   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Add symbol=? and boolean=?   Per Bothner
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Add symbol=? and boolean=?   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Add symbol=? and boolean=?   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Add symbol=? and boolean=?   Robby Findler
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Add symbol=? and boolean=?   Aubrey Jaffer
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] Continuations....   bear
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Add symbol=? and boolean=?   Per Bothner
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Add symbol=? and boolean=?   Per Bothner
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Add symbol=? and boolean=?   bear
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Add symbol=? and boolean=?   Nils M Holm
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Add symbol=? and boolean=?   Per Bothner
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Add symbol=? and boolean=?   Robby Findler
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Add symbol=? and boolean=?   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Add symbol=? and boolean=?   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   bear
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   bear
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   bear
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Joe Marshall
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] floor, ceiling, truncate, and round are unnecessarily over-specified on infinities and NaNs   bear
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] should allow quoting non-letters in identifiers   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] Comparing Strings   MichaelL at frogware.com
• [r6rs-discuss] Comparing Strings   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] Comparing Strings   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] Unicode version   Bob Burger
• [r6rs-discuss] Unicode version   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] re: hash-table-hash-function should return a function   Daniel Villeneuve
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Confusing comparison with Pascal call-by-reference   Mikael Tillenius
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Datum values, shared structure and eq? vs equal?   Mikael Tillenius
• [r6rs-discuss] Why are fx+ and fx* restricted to two arguments   Mikael Tillenius
• [r6rs-discuss] Byte Arrays in the Lexical Syntax   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] Why are fx+ and fx* restricted to two arguments   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] Why are fx+ and fx* restricted to two arguments   Mikael Tillenius
• [r6rs-discuss] Why are fx+ and fx* restricted to two arguments   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] Why are fx+ and fx* restricted to two arguments   bear
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Robby Findler
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] Why are fx+ and fx* restricted to two arguments   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] Why are fx+ and fx* restricted to two arguments   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] Why are fx+ and fx* restricted to two arguments   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] Why are fx+ and fx* restricted to two arguments   Mikael Tillenius
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Bytevectors: Sections 2.5 and 2.6 are inappropriately structured.   Ludovic Courtès
• [r6rs-discuss] Why are fx+ and fx* restricted to two arguments   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] Why are fx+ and fx* restricted to two arguments   Mikael Tillenius
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] proc in hash-table-update! should not mutate hash-table   Daniel Villeneuve
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] hash-table-mutable? vs hash-table-immutable?   Daniel Villeneuve
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] procedures passed to make-hash-table should not mutate the hash table   Daniel Villeneuve
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] modified interface to list-sort and vector-sort   Daniel Villeneuve
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Abdulaziz Ghuloum
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Felix Klock
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Felix Klock
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Abdulaziz Ghuloum
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Abdulaziz Ghuloum
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Abdulaziz Ghuloum
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Abdulaziz Ghuloum
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Abdulaziz Ghuloum
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Abdulaziz Ghuloum
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Confusing comparison with Pascal call-by-reference   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Datum values, shared structure and eq? vs equal?   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Robby Findler
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Abdulaziz Ghuloum
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] modified interface to list-sort and vector-sort   Felix Klock
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Datum values, shared structure and eq? vs equal?   Mikael Tillenius
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] I/O: `call-with-port' and multiple returns   Ludovic Courtès
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] modified interface to list-sort and vector-sort   Aubrey Jaffer
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Confusing comparison with Pascal call-by-reference   Mikael Tillenius
• [r6rs-discuss] Expansion process   Per Bothner
• [r6rs-discuss] Expansion process   Jens Axel Søgaard
• [r6rs-discuss] Expansion process   Per Bothner
• [r6rs-discuss] Expansion process   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] Expansion process   Per Bothner
• [r6rs-discuss] Expansion process   AndrevanTonder
• [r6rs-discuss] Expansion process   Per Bothner
• [r6rs-discuss] Expansion process   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] proc in hash-table-update! should not mutate hash-table   Jed Davis
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] modified interface to list-sort and vector-sort   Daniel Villeneuve
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] right shift formula and bit-field signedness   Daniel Villeneuve
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] I/O: Bytevector output ports and `set-port-position!'   Ludovic Courtès
• [r6rs-discuss] Expansion process   AndrevanTonder
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Datum values, shared structure and eq? vs equal?   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] I/O: `call-with-port' and multiple returns   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Confusing comparison with Pascal call-by-reference   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Robby Findler
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] proc in hash-table-update! should not mutate hash-table   Daniel Villeneuve
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] proc in hash-table-update! should not mutate hash-table   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] SRFI-39 should be made an R6RS library   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] proc in hash-table-update! should not mutate hash-table   Daniel Villeneuve
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] proc in hash-table-update! should not mutate hash-table   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] proc in hash-table-update! should not mutate hash-table   Sam TH
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] modified interface to list-sort and vector-sort   Daniel Villeneuve
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Matthias Felleisen
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] proc in hash-table-update! should not mutate hash-table   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Arthur A. Gleckler
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Per Bothner
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Shiro Kawai
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] proc in hash-table-update! should not mutate hash-table   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Joe Marshall
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Joe Marshall
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Joe Marshall
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Joe Marshall
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Joe Marshall
• [r6rs-discuss] things that suck   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Joe Marshall
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Arthur A. Gleckler
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] operational or denotational semantics?   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Anton van Straaten
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] proc in hash-table-update! should not mutate hash-table   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Felix Klock
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] operational or denotational semantics?   Robby Findler
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Matthias Felleisen
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Matthias Felleisen
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: operational or denotational semantics?   Matthias Felleisen
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Abdulaziz Ghuloum
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   R. Kent Dybvig
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Matthias Felleisen
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Abdulaziz Ghuloum
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: r6rs-discuss Digest, Vol 6, Issue 39   Matthias Felleisen
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: r6rs-discuss Digest, Vol 6, Issue 39   Abdulaziz Ghuloum
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Pascal Costanza
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Abdulaziz Ghuloum
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Per Bothner
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Abdulaziz Ghuloum
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Matthias Felleisen
• [r6rs-discuss] Interpreters need not apply?   Aubrey Jaffer
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Aubrey Jaffer
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] operational or denotational semantics?   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: operational or denotational semantics?   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] operational or denotational semantics?   Robby Findler
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: operational or denotational semantics?   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: operational or denotational semantics?   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: Interpreters need not apply?   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] operational or denotational semantics?   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] operational or denotational semantics?   Robby Findler
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Matthias Felleisen
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: operational or denotational semantics?   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: operational or denotational semantics?   Matthias Felleisen
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: operational or denotational semantics?   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: operational or denotational semantics?   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Matthias Felleisen
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Jon Wilson
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: operational or denotational semantics?   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] Re: Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Jeff Read
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Per Bothner
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Pascal Costanza
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Shiro Kawai
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] I/O: `call-with-port' and multiple returns   Ludovic Courtès
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Per Bothner
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] I/O: `call-with-port' and multiple returns   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Arthur A. Gleckler
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Anton van Straaten
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Arthur A. Gleckler
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Per Bothner
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Dr. Michael Pfiz
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   William D Clinger
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Anton van Straaten
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Anton van Straaten
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Pascal Costanza
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Joe Marshall
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Arthur A. Gleckler
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Arthur A. Gleckler
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Per Bothner
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Joe Marshall
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Pascal Costanza
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Anton van Straaten
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Jed Davis
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   John Cowan
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Joe Marshall
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Per Bothner
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Jed Davis
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Jon Wilson
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Jon Wilson
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Abdulaziz Ghuloum
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Robby Findler
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Abdulaziz Ghuloum
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Confusing comparison with Pascal call-by-reference   Michael Sperber
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   bear
• [r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations   Thomas Lord
• [r6rs-discuss] [OT] [Was: Allow compilers to reject obvious violations] Should compilers preserve termination?   Joe Marshall
• [r6rs-discuss] [OT] Should compilers preserve termination?   Paul Schlie

Last message date: Wed Feb 28 21:40:55 EDT 2007
Archived on: Wed Feb 28 21:41:34 EDT 2007

• Messages sorted by: [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
• More info on this list...