help-gnu-emacs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Style Issues in Lisp and Scheme programming, setq versus let ... and


From: gnuist007
Subject: Re: Style Issues in Lisp and Scheme programming, setq versus let ... and onion structure with multiple cores or eyes or kernels Re: string to list or string to array
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 20:20:32 -0700 (PDT)
User-agent: G2/1.0

On Oct 24, 8:03 am, Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> wrote:
> > btw, Lisp's prefix notation, (f x y z) is more expressive and
> > convenient for expressing currying (((f x) y) z) than f(x y z).
>
> With all due respect to Lisp, that's not true.  Curried calls in the
> non-Lisp syntax are simply "f(x)(y)(z)" or even better "f x y z".
>
>         Stefan

As an aside you show the notation. well and good. But I realize that
there is no executable substitute or ability to return a curried
function
in emacs. Consider these forms.

(+ 2 3 4) ;; executable
(((+ 2) 3) 4)  ;; not executable
(cons '+ (cons 2 (cons 3 (cons 4 nil))))  ;; ditto
(eval  '(+ (cons 2 (cons 3 (cons 4 nil)))))  ;; ditto

Can anyone suggest an executable version of first in terms of curried
addition?

Since Pascal is busy, and David Kastrup is not seen for quite some
time, I hope someone can give a reply to the question of the thread.

G


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]