Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!bronze!copper!kiran From: kiran@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme Subject: Order of evaluation (was Re: evaluating () should be an error Message-ID: Date: 26 Mar 91 19:55:54 GMT References: <1991Mar24.064144.4256@daffy.cs.wisc.edu> <2977@kraftbus.cs.tu-berlin.de> <1991Mar26.155905.12906@daffy.cs.wisc.edu> Sender: news@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (USENET News System) Organization: Indiana University Lines: 16 quale@saavik.cs.wisc.edu (Douglas E. Quale) writes: >Of course going to far in this direction might lead to specifying the >evaluation order of arguments to procedures, and I don't think that would be >good. >-- Doug Quale >quale@picard.cs.wisc.edu Why not? -- ...kiran __________kiran@copper.ucs.indiana.edu________(812) 331-1710 From the corrections column in a July Fresno, CA _Bee_: "An item in Thursday's [issue] about the Massachusetts budget crisis made reference to new taxes that will help put Massachusetts 'back in the African-American.' The item should have said 'back in the black.'"