Peter Harris <scav at blueyonder.co.uk> writes:
> Hi
>
> The latest version of PEP 309 has been published in the usual place. I
> hope much of the woollyness (sp?) of the early versions has been
> sheared off, leaving more ..um..
> [metaphor panic!] .. mutton?
>
> I have settled on calling the whole thing "partial function
> application",
Thank you! The functional programming community (of which I'm
probably not really a member ;-> ) thanks you!
> broadly including object methods, classes and other callable
> objects. I want to name the constructor partial(), because that
> name will do for now and doesn't do violence to accepted terminology
> the way curry() or closure() would.
<snip>
> Not sure what sort of feedback the PEP needs before review, so I'm
> open to any comments about the wording of the proposal and the
> usefulness or otherwise of its intent.
>
> If anyone can think of any really elegant hacks that are naturally
> expressed by partial function application I'd like to see them
There are millions, but AFAICT they're all more natural with lambda,
so...
"I agree that lambda is usually good enough, just not
always."
Examples, please?
"And I want the possibility of useful introspection and
subclassing"
Can you elaborate on that, please?
--
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4