jvanderhyde <jamesvh...@hotmail.com> writes: > Another random thought: What to you call this? > [(+ 2 3) (+ 4 5)] > It is an expression, but it is not a literal--I cannot say it "evaluates to > itself."
So, only symbols and keywords really evaluate to themselves. All you are showing is that vectors and lists are evaluated differently. It's not true, for instance the first element of a literal list is treated as a function. It's treated as a form that is evaluated. So for example: ((f x) y z) would fail iff we expect the first element to be a function -- in this case, it's not, it's a list! But it works because (f x) is evaled and it evals to a function (well, if it doesn't it's going to crash). You get around this by teaching that evaluation is inside out -- we start from the inner form first, > Sorry if I'm being pedantic. Maybe it doesn't matter. Terminology is > important, though, when I'm trying to teach. Whether it is important or not depends on what you teach next. In general, I would try and stick to the terminology of that Clojure uses. Phil -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
