Car and cdr (Re: Python syntax in Lisp and Scheme)

[Pascal Bourguignon]

Pascal Costanza <costanza at web.de> writes:

> Hartmann Schaffer wrote:
> 
>  > In article <bmgh32$1a32$1 at f1node01.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>,
>  >     Pascal Costanza <costanza at web.de> writes:
>  >
>  >> ...
>  >> I think that's the essential point here. The advantage of the
>     names car and cdr is that they _don't_ mean anything specific.
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > gdee, you should read early lisp history ;-).  car and cdr ha[d|ve] a
>  > very specific meaning
> 
> 
> Yes, but noone (noone at all) refers to that meaning anymore. It's a
> historical accident that doesn't really matter anymore when developing
> code.

Indeed.  Had the first lisp been  programmed on a 680x0, we would have
d0 and d1 instead of car and  cdr, or worse, had it been done on 8086,
we would have ax and bx...

-- 
__Pascal_Bourguignon__
http://www.informatimago.com/
Do not adjust your mind, there is a fault in reality.