From: Lionel Thiry <lthiryidontwantspam@...>
Date: 2004-05-01T19:49:01+09:00
Subject: Re: Lazy evaluation (evil)

gabriele renzi a �crit :

> il Sat, 01 May 2004 12:29:59 +0200, Kristof Bastiaensen
> <kristof@vleeuwen.org> ha scritto::
> 
> 
> 
>>From a conceptual point of view is callcc very important.
> 
>>It is not just added because it may seem like a good feature,
>>but because it makes Ruby a real functional language (like scheme).
> 
> 
> I think this sentence may be incorrect.
>  I mean, haskell, ocaml and lisp all does not have call/cc yet they're
> functional languages.
> (actually I'm not sure if lisp, ocaml and scheme can be defined as
> functional languages, cause they're not pure ones, if I'm correct)
> 
> 
Ocaml is a functionnal langage of the ML family. It means it abuses of 
pattern matching and allows for side effects. As far as I know, lisp and 
scheme are pure functionnal langage as they don't allow side effects. 
But perhaps I'm wrong. And I'm often wrong. ;)

About Ruby, I must tell I find it hard to see where Ruby is functionnal 
langage. Coding recursivity in ruby is most of the time so uneasy. I 
just wonder, if someone can explain, he'll be welcome.

Lio