Skip to main content
3 of 3
added 2 characters in body
SMA
  • 173
  • 1
  • 6

Is Applicative-order and Normal-order evaluation model's definition contradictory as per sicp text book?

As per this explaination, it defines applicative and normal order evaluation in one form saying:

This alternative "fully expand and then reduce" evaluation method is known as normal-order evaluation, in contrast to the "evaluate the arguments and then apply" method that the interpreter actually uses, which is called applicative-order evaluation.

while this explanation defines the other way around

applicative-order language, namely, that all the arguments to Scheme procedures are evaluated when the procedure is applied. In contrast, normal-order languages delay evaluation of procedure arguments until the actual argument values are needed

They seem to contradict each other. Do these definitions mean the same thing?

SMA
  • 173
  • 1
  • 6