Re: The beauty of LATEX
Dave Abrahams <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lib.boost.documentation |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
on Wed Oct 26 2011, Joel de Guzman <joel-AT-boost-consulting.com> wrote: > On 10/26/2011 4:40 PM, Daniel James wrote: >> On Tuesday, 25 October 2011, Joel de Guzman wrote: > >> >> On 10/25/2011 6:01 PM, Daniel James wrote: >> > >> > Yes, that works. Although now when you want to pass the function as a >> > parameter, you have to define another lambda function. Which could get >> > very verbose - especially if the function takes a few arguments. It >> >> That's how it's done in lisp/scheme, it's foolish to go invent >> something else. >> >> > also requires you to always know how many arguments a function takes. >> >> What's wrong with that? Ah, you want it like C function pointers >> where you pass only f and be done with it? That's too limiting. >> You can't even curry with it. >> >> >> You can do that in Scheme: >> >> http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/full-text/book/book-Z-H-12.html#%_sec_1.3.1 > > Oh right, I forgot about that. Yes, we can have both. No offense, but this is starting to sound a little silly... Could someone explain to me why we don't use a real scheme (or some other) interpreter? -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com