Scheme mistakes (was Re: nil)

[Shriram Krishnamurthi <address@hidden>]

mike@newhall.net wrote:

>     Why is it a good thing to make using a continuation object look less
> like a function application and also a good thing to make using a
> vector object look more like a function application?

I may be wrong, but I think Matthias was being *sarcastic*.  I read
what he was saying as, "If we're going to conflate the notation for
using continuations with that for functions, why not conflate the
notation for vectors with that of functions also?"  Of course, this is
the point where Paul Graham should hop in and point out that Arc does
precisely this (as I recall).

Shriram