change eb1 expected test results to #true

[haroldcarr]

Even though y is free, it seems the grammar allows this. So expected results were wrong.

[wilbowma]

The text of the tutorial still explains that eb1 shouldn't be a lambda?. My guess is that the test is right, but the implementation of lambda? is not as the author intended. Probably, anything that binds the same name twice in the same argument list should not be a lambda?. Alternatively, the grammar is wrong and should be somehow enforcing uniqueness of names.

[haroldcarr]

It seems to me that the text LATER changes the Lambda definition to disallow repeated parameters. But at this point in the text Lambda does allow them. lambda? checks Lambda. It seems to me that the test value is incorrect.

[wilbowma]

Oh that's a good point. In that case, I wonder if the failing test was a rhetorical device from a lecture and should be expected to fail. I'll leave that to @rfindler.

[rfindler]

I did do some attempt to get these into running shape (but apparently not enough), but the lecture notes were originally @mfelleisen 's.