> On Aug 2, 2018, at 11:25 AM, Scott <scott.d.la...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> My message does not contain the word “recursion.”
> No it doesn't. However, Structure and Interpretation of the Computer Science
> Curriculum does, as it does your criticism of SICP's use of (generative)
> recursion.
Sure, but please don’t put words in my email mouth :-) And there are many other
words in SiCP and HtDP that you could mention.
;; - - -
I am sensitive about “recursion” because many people completely fail to
understand the role of recursion in these books, especially in HtDP. The idea
is important because it is the only way to describe arbitrarily large data and
data descriptions have implications for code organization. Since arbitrarily
large data is more interesting than #true and “hello world”, it shows up in
every programming book. What HtDP/2e shows in Intermezzo 3-4 is how “recursion
as induced by data descriptions” disappears under other constructs.
The same is true about the word “functional”. Sure, I distilled the design
recipe idea from the world of functional languages. But that’s only because the
world of dysfunctional languages never produced any ideas concerning systematic
design. What HtDP/1e showed was that the design recipe idea applies perfectly
well to imperative and OO programming.
— Matthias
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
