[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: pure simple-closures

From: Han-Wen Nienhuys
Subject: Re: pure simple-closures
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2006 17:07:29 +0200
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20061008)

Joe Neeman escreveu:
On Sat, 2006-10-21 at 17:29 +0200, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
Joe Neeman schreef:
On Sat, 2006-10-21 at 12:15 +0200, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
Joe Neeman schreef:

Mostly because at the time that I wrote it, I couldn't figure out how to
handle arbitrary length argument lists in scheme (the only way I
currently know is to build the list of arguments, cons in the function
I think you're looking for the apply function,

   (apply func arg-list)
Ah yes, that's much better. So did you want me to put call_pure_function
in scheme?
yes, I think so. The most important thing is that subsystems should not cross the C++/Scheme divide all too often. Since most of the func->pure -func code is in Scheme, I think it's best we keep improvements there.

How's this one? I also changed from using SCM_UNDEFINED to
SCM_UNSPECIFIED so I could restore and added

as a completely unrelated remark: I just realized that simple-closure is probably an incorrect name. How about simple-curry?


Han-Wen Nienhuys - address@hidden -

LilyPond Software Design
 -- Code for Music Notation

reply via email to

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