Subject: Re: quest for pass-by-reference semantics in CL From: Erik Naggum <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 21:31:24 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <email@example.com> * Erann Gat | That's news to me. I've never heard of this distinction before. Could | you please cite a reference? It was intended to make you think. It did not work this time, either. I am sorry that you need somebody else to tell you the same thing I do before you can muster the brainpower to think about something. Your curious selectivity in asking for references is quite telling. It is a sort of passive-aggressive behavior that I associate with cowards who think they can get away with their not-so-veiled hostilities. | Kent's approach is to invent a new story about argument passing that he | calls "call-by-identity". Did he provide any references for this novel term? Why do you ask for references as a means of terrorizing people into silence when it is so obvious that you are being a hostile prick even when people try to deal with you as the intelligent being you once were and actually try to answer your mostly retarded questions seriously? Geez, I keep making the mistake of believing you will recover, somehow. -- In a fight against something, the fight has value, victory has none. In a fight for something, the fight is a loss, victory merely relief. 70 percent of American adults do not understand the scientific process.