Talk:Partial function application: Difference between revisions

Content added Content deleted

Inline

Revision as of 20:26, 14 April 2011 (view source) rosettacode>Kernigh (The update is OK with me. Java solution.) ← Older edit		Revision as of 23:07, 14 April 2011 (view source) rosettacode>Paddy3118 (→‎Explicit curry vs Partial application: Java not partial application.) Newer edit →
Line 84:		Line 84:

	: This <tt>fs()</tt> explicitly curries ''itself''. So <tt>fsf1</tt> never has to mention <tt>s</tt> nor pass the return value from <tt>fs()</tt>. --[[User:Kernigh\|Kernigh]] 20:26, 14 April 2011 (UTC)		: This <tt>fs()</tt> explicitly curries ''itself''. So <tt>fsf1</tt> never has to mention <tt>s</tt> nor pass the return value from <tt>fs()</tt>. --[[User:Kernigh\|Kernigh]] 20:26, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

			:: Hi Kernigh, the above is ''not'' like Haskel, in fact it doesn't really answer the task as you have made fs a function of only f, then called it with different f. Partial application would be like the Haskel: fs is a function of f ''and s'' and then fsfl is the result of applying only f1 to fs, without mention of any other argument. The above may give a result, but it is ''how'' it gets to that result that is the issue. --[[User:Paddy3118\|Paddy3118]] 23:07, 14 April 2011 (UTC)