Subject: Re: Lambda calculus and it relation to LISP From: Erik Naggum <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: 09 Oct 2002 14:58:29 +0000 Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp,sci.math,comp.emacs Message-ID: <email@example.com> * David Kastrup | How does one create ad-hoc function objects in more standard variants of | Lisp? You got to be kidding. The only purpose of the horrid complexity of (lambda (f g) `(lambda (n) (,g (funcall ,f ,f ,g) n))) is to capture the values of the `f´ and `g´ bindings. In Common Lisp, we have closures and write (lambda (f g) (lambda (n) (g (funcall f f g) n))) | Emacs has no problem with that. Emacs Lisp has serious problems with closures. That is why you think you need this nonsense to begin with. One question remains: Why are you programming in Emacs Lisp while claiming to be programming in Lisp without being aware of the serious limitations of Emacs Lisp? I mean, you /got/ to be kidding when you imply that you do not know that every other modern Lisp has closures. -- Erik Naggum, Oslo, Norway Act from reason, and failure makes you rethink and study harder. Act from faith, and failure makes you blame someone and push harder.