3 ms·
> The namesake, lambda calculus, doesn't have it (I think?). Lambdas in the Lambda Calculus have to be closures, how else would you build functions of multiple
by tempodox 4y ago
> The namesake, lambda calculus, doesn't have it (I think?).
Lambdas in the Lambda Calculus have to be closures, how else would you build functions of multiple arguments? Think:
λx.λy.(x + y)
If they weren't closures, `x` would be unbound in the inner lambda.
- fulafel 4y agoAh, right. And apparently this was a prime motivation to for the first Lispy closures implementation, which was called... Scheme. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Scheme:_An_Interpreter_for_Extended_Lambda_Calculus https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Scheme:_An_Interpreter_for_Ex... "we have implemented an interpreter for a LISP-like language, SCHEME, based on the lambda calculus [Church]"