Re: Reference and First-Class Function

> From: Vladimir Nesterovsky <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 5:27:21 AM
> Subject: Re: [exslt] Reference and First-Class Function
> 
> > o Higher order function support would be good to have.
> > o Sequence references would be good to have.
> > o Since HOF closures look a lot like sequence references, if we're going to 
> have both we should implement one in terms of the other.
> 
> I think it's rather untrivial to implement refereneces in terms
> of higher order functions through extension functions and extension objects 
> only.

+ 1

Completely agree with that! Asking to implement HOFs as a prerequisite of implementing references results in a much more complicated and difficult to implemented specification. 

References can be implemented without needing an implementation of HOFs. This is much more simple, requires less effort and is therefore more realistic.

See my answer to John Snelson on this topic at:
http://lists.fourthought.com/pipermail/exslt/2008-December/001759.html


Cheers,
Dimitre