Talk:Partial function application: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
m (→Proposal for new task description: move re) |
|||
| Line 206: | Line 206: | ||
:::Hi again Ruud. I was sure that there would be languages with first-class functions that would not be able to curry/partially-apply. What is new to me is that there may well be languages that are OK with currying, but have problems with partial application as they can't apply a subset of arguments without ''explicitely'' mentioning all arguments in the call to partial. Some manidestly, statically typed languages - i.e. those that require a type signature for everything, would need different and explicit type signatures dependant on how many arguments were being partially applied for example; Haskel works it out for itself. |
:::Hi again Ruud. I was sure that there would be languages with first-class functions that would not be able to curry/partially-apply. What is new to me is that there may well be languages that are OK with currying, but have problems with partial application as they can't apply a subset of arguments without ''explicitely'' mentioning all arguments in the call to partial. Some manidestly, statically typed languages - i.e. those that require a type signature for everything, would need different and explicit type signatures dependant on how many arguments were being partially applied for example; Haskel works it out for itself. |
||
:::Somehow, I do notice the similarity between currying and PFA, but unlike you, I see it as a strong reason to have two, contrasting tasks. What to do? --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 03:28, 16 April 2011 (UTC) |
:::Somehow, I do notice the similarity between currying and PFA, but unlike you, I see it as a strong reason to have two, contrasting tasks. What to do? --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 03:28, 16 April 2011 (UTC) |
||
| ⚫ | |||
:::: I think it's somewhat more than a similarity: in the Haskell example we have that <code>papply2</code> = <code>curry</code> and <code>papply3</code> ≈ <code>curry3</code>. In the Ruby partial application and currying are both implemented by <code>Prox#curry</code>. It would be fun to see how a <code>curry</code> function in Python looks that works for functions of any arity like <code>partial</code> does (if this is possible) and how similar their definitions would be. Their currently isn't a task on [[Currying]]. Would it be a problem to create a new task [[Currying and partial application]] or does Rosetta Code strive to avoid duplicated and overlapping entries? —''[[User:Ruud Koot|Ruud]]'' 09:40, 17 April 2011 (UTC) |
:::: I think it's somewhat more than a similarity: in the Haskell example we have that <code>papply2</code> = <code>curry</code> and <code>papply3</code> ≈ <code>curry3</code>. In the Ruby partial application and currying are both implemented by <code>Prox#curry</code>. It would be fun to see how a <code>curry</code> function in Python looks that works for functions of any arity like <code>partial</code> does (if this is possible) and how similar their definitions would be. Their currently isn't a task on [[Currying]]. Would it be a problem to create a new task [[Currying and partial application]] or does Rosetta Code strive to avoid duplicated and overlapping entries? —''[[User:Ruud Koot|Ruud]]'' 09:40, 17 April 2011 (UTC) |
||
| ⚫ | |||
<lang haskell> |
<lang haskell> |
||