From: verec
Subject: CLtL3 ???
Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 18:34:42 +0000
Message-ID: <4a0f0742$0$519$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk>

http://ilc2009.scheming.org/node/48
--
JFB

• Re: CLtL3 ??? Pillsy
• Re: CLtL3 ??? Lars Rune Nøstdal
  • Re: CLtL3 ??? Lars Rune Nøstdal
    • Re: CLtL3 ??? Benjamin Tovar

From: Pillsy
Subject: Re: CLtL3 ???
Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 19:26:15 +0000
Message-ID: <0a9caaec-6d36-49c5-8817-0cfa15edd84e@x6g2000vbg.googlegroups.com>

On May 16, 2:34 pm, verec <·····@mac.com> wrote:
> http://ilc2009.scheming.org/node/48

It seems like a fine idea to me, but I am skeptical that it will get
anywhere.

Cheers,
Pillsy

From: Lars Rune Nøstdal
Subject: Re: CLtL3 ???
Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 01:48:39 +0000
Message-ID: <1dead2b4-bb75-417a-94fa-de1127dbd84c@n21g2000vba.googlegroups.com>

On May 16, 8:34 pm, verec <·····@mac.com> wrote:
> http://ilc2009.scheming.org/node/48
> --
> JFB

It's got what plants crave.

From: Lars Rune Nøstdal
Subject: Re: CLtL3 ???
Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 01:58:16 +0000
Message-ID: <fd7fb395-a82a-4667-b865-effccf59c29d@s21g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>

On May 17, 3:48 am, Lars Rune Nøstdal <···········@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 16, 8:34 pm, verec <·····@mac.com> wrote:
>
> >http://ilc2009.scheming.org/node/48
> > --
> > JFB
>
> It's got what plants crave.

Ok, that was dumb.

Why is a REPL considered "fancy"? I think every other "problem" fades
in comparison.

From: Benjamin Tovar
Subject: Re: CLtL3 ???
Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 02:30:19 +0000
Message-ID: <87r5yoxxz8.fsf@the.google.mail.thing>

Lars Rune Nøstdal <···········@gmail.com> writes:

> On May 17, 3:48 am, Lars Rune Nøstdal <···········@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On May 16, 8:34 pm, verec <·····@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>> >http://ilc2009.scheming.org/node/48
>> > --
>> > JFB
>>
>> It's got what plants crave.
>
> Ok, that was dumb.
>
> Why is a REPL considered "fancy"? I think every other "problem" fades
> in comparison.

Why? Because it has electrolytes, of course.


-- 
Benjamin Tovar