2 May
2004
2 May
'04
5:28 p.m.
Daniel Wallin wrote:
Max Khesin wrote: [snip]
and by extension bind(f, _1, _2, _0)(x, y, z) would be equivalent to f(x, y)
I don't get it, what is _0 here? AFAICT
bind(f, _1, _2)(x, y, z)
is already the equivalent of
f(x, y)
ok, I guessed that I was missing something. Thanks Daniel, I'll go check it out!