2010/9/2 David Sankel <camior@gmail.com>
2010/9/2 Dave Abrahams <dave@boostpro.com>
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 11:57 AM, David Sankel <camior@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello all,
I've been working on an alternate bind syntax based on De Bruijn indices[1]. The syntax is very simple, yet the terms are very powerful.
Here is an example of a function const that takes in an argument c and returns another function that, for all input, returns c:
//λx.λy.x = λλ1 with De Bruijn indices.
Not according to the page you linked below. What am I missing?
Sorry about that. The wikipedia page uses 1-indexed indices where I'm using 0-indexed indices. So, increment 1 on all my examples to get the wikipedia syntax.
I'm beginning to think it is better to use 1-indexing instead of 0-indexing all around. It will be both compatible with the Wikipedia page and familiar to boost bind/lambda users. Funny thing is, I started with 1-indexing but changed it to 0-indexing for the fallacious reasoning of the arrrrgh function that Dave A mentioned. -- David Sankel Sankel Software www.sankelsoftware.com 585 617 4748 (Office)