3 ms·
I like the syntax. Being able to define a lambda with f x y = x + y or define a table with z.i = x.i + y.i looks really clean to me. It avoids the s
by yiyus 7y ago
I like the syntax. Being able to define a lambda with
f x y = x + y
or define a table with
z.i = x.i + y.i
looks really clean to me. It avoids the stinking loops, but it is more obvious than the implicit names used in APL/J/K.
Function application binding more tightly than infix operators and then having $ for grouping is also an interesting solution.
- crimsonalucard 7y agoGlad you like it. It's nothing new though. Haskell and many ML family languages have this syntax. The table syntax is def new though.
- klipt 7y agoNit: that's not a lambda (anonymous function), it's a regular function called f :-)