Subject: RE: Higher-order function support as means to reduce the "standard" operators/functions. (Was(Re: [xsl] Re: . in for)) From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 19:13:10 -0000 |
> Based on my brief example it is clear, that the standard > language can be kept small, > allowing at the same time any desired functionality to be > easily implemented by > programmers, based on higher-order function support. > Let me say that I agree with you entirely on this. I wish I could convince my colleagues. There are complexities, I'm sure, in extending the type system to handle higher-order functions. But I'm sure that given a will, these could be resolved. Mike Kay XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Higher-order function support as me, Dimitre Novatchev | Thread | Re: [xsl] Re: . in for, Dimitre Novatchev |
Case of function names (Was: Re: [x, Jeni Tennison | Date | Re: [xsl] Re: . in for, Dimitre Novatchev |
Month |