This is the mail archive of the kawa@sourceware.org mailing list for the Kawa project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: alternative array syntax


Per Bothner <per@bothner.com> writes:

> Bruce Lewis wrote:
> > Yes there will
> > be people occasionally confused as to why they can't pass arrays to
> > higher-order functions that expect procedures as arguments, but that
> > cost is worth the benefit.
> 
> No reason you can't pass an array to a higher-order function that
> expects an Applicable - and unless you do an explicit type test,
> no reason it wouldn't work automatically.  E.g. we'd probably
> want to generalize map and for-each to work on Applicable objects.

Right.  This occurred to me this morning as I was getting on the train.
There's no reason a higher-order function written in Scheme wouldn't
just work, so long as the apply procedure works on non-procedure
Applicables.

All the more reason to just go ahead and do it.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]