Subject: [CSG111] Re: CSG111 MP5: Question about extending let statements
From: Therapon Skotiniotis (skotthe@ccs.neu.edu)
Date: Fri Mar 03 2006 - 22:08:15 EST
On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 09:37:01PM -0500, Zach Kissel wrote:
> Hi All,
> For the second question it seems to me that in order for the
> let-exp to have multiple arguements is to modify the let we have now
> because the grammar will become ambiguous if we create a new let
> expression. I'm assuming we should be modifying the let-exp and
> proc-exp is this assumption correct?
Yes.
-- Theo
_______________________________________________
csg111 mailing list
csg111@lists.ccs.neu.edu
https://lists.ccs.neu.edu/bin/listinfo/csg111
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Mar 15 2007 - 15:00:09 EDT