- From: Pete Haglich <phaglic@isx.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 10:24:51 -0500
- To: www-rdf-rules@w3.org
On Feb 16, 2007, at 10:02 AM, Drew McDermott wrote: > But you're wrong about this. There must be a list with exactly one > element, nil, and it must be distinct from nil. Otherwise you get all > kinds of anomalies. (For instance, the list (nil nil) = nil, > because rest[(nil nil)] = (nil) = nil, so (nil nil) = (nil) = nil.) Congratulations for reinventing the whole numbers and proving that 1 = 0 if one does it wrong. With tongue in cheek, returning to lurk mode. -- Pete Haglich Lockheed Martin Advanced Technology Laboratories, ISX Laboratory Virginia Beach, VA
Received on Friday, 16 February 2007 15:25:09 UTC