Why would you consider lamba to be self modifying? Isn't it just a procedure definition?
-- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי נֵ֣צַח יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א יְשַׁקֵּ֖ר ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> on behalf of Paul Gilmartin <0000042bfe9c879d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> Sent: Monday, November 11, 2024 2:17 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: What is a "programming language"? Was:: Modifying JCL on the fly Caution: This email did not originate from George Mason’s mail system. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. On Mon, 11 Nov 2024 19:04:02 +0000, Seymour J Metz wrote: >"So, unless it support the generally considered poor practice of self >modifying code at runtime, it's not a programming language?" is totally >unrelated to anything he wrote. > Should LISP's LAMBDA be considered "self modifying"? Likewise function definitions in POSIX shell? -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
