Subject: Re: Lambda calculus and it relation to LISP
From: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.no>
Date: 09 Oct 2002 14:58:29 +0000
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp,sci.math,comp.emacs
Message-ID: <3243164309543923@naggum.no>

* 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.