Re: Q: access to subprogram

[rogoff@sccm.Stanford.EDU (Brian Rogoff)]

bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff) writes:
   In article <ROGOFF.96Jul22154757@sccm.Stanford.EDU>,
   Brian Rogoff <rogoff@sccm.stanford.edu> wrote:
   >ok@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au (Richard A. O'Keefe) writes:
   >   rogoff@sccm.Stanford.EDU (Brian Rogoff) writes:
   >   [about nested procedures as parameters of other procedures]
   >
   >   >I guess I would ask Pascal programmers how useful they found this, and whether 
   >   >any interesting idioms emerged which used this feature.

   Iterators.

Hi Bob,
	While this is now straying a bit from Ada 95, I'm curious as to 
whether you find Pascal style iterators using downward funargs (there, I'm 
using Lisp terminology) superior to CLU/Sather-1.0 style iterators. And 
how do the Ada 95 alternatives stack up? Also, were these downward funargs 
widely used, or was there a small set of problems in which they were the ideal
vehicle of expression, like the multidimensioal integration example? I realize 
in Scheme that functions are used for everything, so I am interested more in 
the answer for Pascal and other Ada-like languages.

	This is a really fascinating question in language design. I'd like 
find some examples like the ones Richard O'Keefe posted, and see what the 
best Ada 95 alternatives are. That way I can get a better sense as to how much 
we are really missing.

   - Bob (ex-Pascal-programmer)

-- Brian (hopefully ex-C-programmer ;-)