[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: LFM + LFSP = LFE?

To: Anton van Straaten <address@hidden>
Subject: RE: LFM + LFSP = LFE?
From: Duncan Mak <address@hidden>
Date: 17 Jun 2003 00:32:15 -0400
Cc: Michael Vanier <address@hidden>, address@hidden
In-reply-to: <00b201c33478$b9deeba0$0a00a8c0@femto.appsolutions.com>
References: <00b201c33478$b9deeba0$0a00a8c0@femto.appsolutions.com>
Sender: address@hidden

On Mon, 2003-06-16 at 22:32, Anton van Straaten wrote:
> Not sure if the version cited above is any different than the one published
> in ACM SIGPLAN Notices, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 231-270, March 1993 (History of
> Programming Languages Conference (HOPL-II), Preprints):
> 
> http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/steele93evolution.html
> 
> This version does contain the text which Guy quoted.
> 

Richard Gabriel also has two versions available on his website as PDF
files:

HOPL-II version - http://www.dreamsongs.com/NewFiles/Hopl2.pdf
'Uncut' version - http://www.dreamsongs.com/NewFiles/HOPL2-Uncut.pdf

The papers from HOPL-II are a lot of fun to read, if you dig around the
web, you can find PDF files of all the papers.

Duncan.

References:
- RE: LFM + LFSP = LFE?
  - From: "Anton van Straaten" <anton@appsolutions.com>

Prev by Date: RE: LFM + LFSP = LFE?
Next by Date: Re: LFM + LFSP = LFE?
Previous by thread: RE: LFM + LFSP = LFE?
Next by thread: RE: LFM + LFSP = LFE?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread