From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: Programmer defined arrays
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 21:54:20 +0200
Date: 2012-08-06T21:54:20+02:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <13jx05ub1u58n$.ntne8jfrs56p$.dlg@40tude.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 50201582$0$9505$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net
On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 21:05:39 +0200, Georg Bauhaus wrote:
> why
> do some ask for more programmer control over the translation process
> for arrays, via array becoming a type suitable for O-O, but function
> not becoming an O-O type?
Of course they do. But there is the rub - when function is a value of some
type then operations of that type are functions of different kind. There is
a potentially infinite hierarchy of such functions. So if you wanted first
class functions you would need some second class functions to operate them.
you would also have to take care about keeping types statically checkable
(static typing). But if you wanted first class arrays there would be
nothing special about them.
--
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-13 9:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-06 14:28 Programmer defined arrays Georg Bauhaus
2012-08-06 14:55 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2012-08-06 17:26 ` Jacob Sparre Andersen
2012-08-06 19:05 ` Georg Bauhaus
2012-08-06 19:54 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov [this message]
2012-08-06 21:03 ` Georg Bauhaus
2012-08-06 21:52 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox