[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: l, the ultimate curry that is not curry
> Al wrote:
>> Sebastian wrote:
>> (curry cons-stream <> stream)
>> <=> (l (object stream) (cons-stream object stream))
> Actually, that would be:
> (curry cons-stream <> stream)
> <=> (l (object) (cons-stream object stream))
You are right, of course. Sorry for the mistake.
If you allow me, I will skip the discussion on the number
of keystrokes involved in typing...
> P.S. The procedural implementation of curry would choke on this
> example, if we assume the usual definition of cons-stream (a macro
> that delays its second argument).
Oops! This is really serious. I will come back to this when
addressing the semantics of the mechanism.
However reads this: Please refer to Al's posting with
subject line > Problems with "curry"'s formal specification <