On 25/08/2011 01:18, Daniel James wrote:
On 24 August 2011 23:11, Mathias Gaunard<mathias.gaunard@ens-lyon.org> wrote:
On 08/24/2011 06:55 PM, Dave Abrahams wrote:
That's an asymmetry about most currying syntax that I never liked, at least for C++. I suppose when all functions are fully lazy there's no assymmetry, but that's not C++. In C++ we have parens to trigger evaluation. Even in Phoenix, laziness only goes partway: you still need parens to trigger final evaluation.
ML-based languages are not lazy and have had currying for 40 years. Yet the academics behind functional programming, lambda calculus, theorem proving and logic still seem to fancy them a lot.
But ML doesn't have C++ style overloading. Currying certain overloaded functions is ambiguous.
Which is why I suggested only applying currying to monomorphic functions.