🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1991Apr26.090956.18799@prl.dec.com>, I gave the following
reference:

> 
> Warren's Abstract Machine: A Tutorial Reconstruction
> Hassan Ait-Kaci
> MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
> 1991
> 
> ISBN 0-262-69246-9 (paper, $17.50)
> ISBN 0-262-01123-9 (cloth, $30.00)
> 
> For ordering information, please contact:
> 
> 	Bob Prior, editor
> 	MIT Press
> 	55 Hayward Street
> 	Cambridge, MA 02142
> 
> 	tel: (617) 253-1584
> 	fax: (617) 258-6779
> 	
> 	e-m: prior@mitvma.mit.edu

in response to a query by jwoehr@isis.cs.du.edu (Jack J. Woehr) expressed
in article <1991Apr25.044927.24023@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> about introductory
material on the WAM (and other things).

This prompted many who already had knowledge of my previous PRL Research
Report No.5 entitled "The WAM: A (Real) Tutorial" to ask me whether the book
differs from the report in any substantial way and whether it is worth getting
the book if one already has that report. I take the liberty to post here my
generic answer to them and those who may be wondering likewise.

The book has essentially the same contents and style as the report. However,
many errors, some harder to discern than others, have been corrected. Also, at
several points, better explanations are given. Finally, the pseudo-code given
in the complete summary of all full WAM instructions and ancillary operations
has been recast to account for all the corrected bugs. This was essentially the
result of the feedback of a few sharp readers who caught my ill accounts. I am grateful to them as expressed in the following paragraph taken verbatim from
the acknowledgement section of the book.

	As the PRL report was being disseminated, I began receiving feedback
	from attentive readers. Some of them caught a few serious bugs that
	remained in that report making some material, as presented there,
	insidiously incorrect.  Naturally, all those mistakes have now been
	corrected in this monograph, and, where appropriate, mention is made of
	those who brought to my attention my erroneous account.  Nevertheless,
	I would like to express here my gratitude to those who kindly reported
	bugs, made insightful comments, gave disturbing counter-examples, or
	proposed better explanations. They are: Christoph Beierle, Andre
	Bolle, Damian Chu, William Clocksin, Maarten van Emden, Michael Hanus,
	Pascal van Hentenryck, Juhani Jaakola, Stott Parker, Fernando Pereira,
	Frank Pfenning, Dave Raggett, Dean Rosenzweig, David Russinoff, and two
	anonymous reviewers.  All remaining mistakes are to be blamed on my own
	incompetence and still imprecise understanding.

Best regards,

-hak